NationStates Jolt Archive

I have noticed a number of people voicing dissatisfaction with certain elements of the black community recently. These things include, but are not constrained to:
1) Black people have more privileges than whites.
2) Black people are more racist than whites in truth.
3) Blacks whine & complain about imagined handicaps in our society.

So I was thinking that maybe you could post any problems(nothing ignorant) you have with the black community, and we could discuss them. I invite all races and peoples into this discussion.

And please, no flaming or mocking. Lets have a nice, civilized discussion. Also, no racism.

1. They are nine times as likely to be murdered as anyone else in the US. And the culprits are 94% likely to be black as well. While that's a problem, don't say I'm the cause.
2. None of my ancestors were here in the US prior to 1954. So don't ask me to pay reparations.

That's it.

er...

1) gangster culture
2) rap
3) they can call someone and naughty word and I can't :(
4) race card (doesn't work if your white for some reason)

1. They are nine times as likely to be murdered as anyone else in the US. And the culprits are 94% likely to be black as well. While that's a problem, don't say I'm the cause.
2. None of my ancestors were here in the US prior to 1954. So don't ask me to pay reparations.

That's it.

1) I agree, white people aren't to blame for blacks killing other blacks. Most blacks don't simply say 'it's whitey's fault' either, most blame it on poverty.

2) The reparations arguement is boring, so let me sum it up for all the caucasians who are so scared off reparations and all the African-Americans who are so for it:

It Will Never Happen.

1) I agree, white people aren't to blame for blacks killing other blacks. Most blacks don't simply say 'it's whitey's fault' either, most blame it on poverty.

2) The reparations arguement is boring, so let me sum it up for all the caucasians who are so scared off reparations and all the African-Americans who are so for it:

It Will Never Happen.

I'm not even a caucasian...

er...

1) gangster culture
2) rap
3) they can call someone and naughty word and I can't :(
4) race card (doesn't work if your white for some reason)

1) I agree gangsta culture is wrong. Its a huge blight on the black community that makes us look ignorant, violent, & immoral.

2) Whats wrong with rap music? As long as no one is talking about 'putting a cap in someone's ass' I'm fine with it. I mean, I listen to most music genres, and rock isn't all that good either.

3) The naughty word you refer to shouldn't be used by anyone.

4) It doesn't work all that well if you're black either.

I'm not even a caucasian...

I didn't say you were, just answering what you said.

I'm not even a caucasian...

Here's a tip. If I'm a member of a company I'm a part of everything that company does and has done as long as I remain a part of it. The government existed during slavery, whether you did or your ancestors were here is irrelevant.

That said, reparations are not going to happen. It's not even that popular.

I have noticed a number of people voicing dissatisfaction with certain elements of the black community recently. These things include, but are not constrained to:
1) Black people have more privileges than whites.
2) Black people are more racist than whites in truth.
3) Blacks whine & complain about imagined handicaps in our society.

So I was thinking that maybe you could post any problems(nothing ignorant) you have with the black community, and we could discuss them. I invite all races and peoples into this discussion.

And please, no flaming or mocking. Lets have a nice, civilized discussion. Also, no racism.

They're better than me at basketball. We allow them to play. Therefore racism doesn't exist.

I listen to most music genres, and rock isn't all that good either.

electronic is superior to your inferior rap music (are there actually good rappers out there who don't talk of how much stuff they have and how bad the life is in X street?)

3) The naughty word you refer to shouldn't be used by anyone.

its just a word

4) It doesn't work all that well if you're black either.

does have a flabbergast affect though

I only have trivial issues.

.
.
.
.
.
Al Sharpton
Jesse Jackson


And that's about it, really.

electronic is superior to your inferior rap music (are there actually good rappers out there who don't talk of how much stuff they have and how bad the life is in X street?)



its just a word



does have a flabbergast affect though

1) I'm not going to debate you on music. Seriously, why do people hate rap, or rock, or country, or whatever? I listen to most all music, and judge it on who's good in any particular genre.

2) With a lot of feeling behind it. And its not like you don't get to say, I've seen plenty of younger people of all races who can say it. When the older crowd dies, thats when it will become more acceptable.

3) Rape has a flabbergast affect too, among other emotions. The fact is the race card has been so played out by Al Sharpton & Jessie Jackson(Who have done so much damage to the black community combined) that it has no affect. And there are still a few times when its appropriate. I'm just sorry the two reverends use it too much.

Here's a tip. If I'm a member of a company I'm a part of everything that company does and has done as long as I remain a part of it. The government existed during slavery, whether you did or your ancestors were here is irrelevant.

That said, reparations are not going to happen. It's not even that popular.

Here's a tip - only if I'm an officer of the company - which I am not.

I only have trivial issues.

.
.
.
.
.
Al Sharpton
Jesse Jackson


And that's about it, really.

My thoughts exactly.

Here's a tip - only if I'm an officer of the company - which I am not.

So because you weren't a part of the company when it screwed up and you're not an officer, the COMPANY isn't responsible for addressing it's mistakes? Does that resemble an argument to you? Sorry, I mean does that resemble a GOOD argument to you?

So because you weren't a part of the company when it screwed up and you're not an officer, the COMPANY isn't responsible for addressing it's mistakes? Does that resemble an argument to you? Sorry, I mean does that resemble a GOOD argument to you?

It means I am not personally liable for what the company did.

And it's a perfectly valid legal argument.

Unless you're an officer of the company, if you had nothing to do with what a company did in the past, you're not liable.

Get it?

It means I am not personally liable for what the company did.

And it's a perfectly valid legal argument.

Unless you're an officer of the company, if you had nothing to do with what a company did in the past, you're not liable.

Get it?

And who is holding you personally liable for reparations? Come on, I know you can see where this is going. You must. And you must also see that you've already established exactly why your argument doesn't address reparations at all and you've shown that in your claims since.

And who is holding you personally liable for reparations? Come on, I know you can see where this is going. You must. And you must also see that you've already established exactly why your argument doesn't address reparations at all and you've shown that in your claims since.

There are plenty of blacks who want to hold anyone who isn't black liable for reparations.

I won't pay them. Period.

There are plenty of blacks who want to hold anyone who isn't black liable for reparations.

I won't pay them. Period.

Stop woring about it. Reparations are impossible. Period.

There are plenty of blacks who want to hold anyone who isn't black liable for reparations.

I won't pay them. Period.

Really? Who? Last I checked reparations was something asked of the government. From the company in our example. You're not an officer so you won't be held personally responsible. No worries.

Really? Who? Last I checked reparations was something asked of the government. From the company in our example. You're not an officer so you won't be held personally responsible. No worries.

Then you won't be taking it out of my paycheck.

It means I am not personally liable for what the company did.

And it's a perfectly valid legal argument.

Unless you're an officer of the company, if you had nothing to do with what a company did in the past, you're not liable.

Get it?

But you are or were a member of the US Govt though right? An officer of sorts in the military perhaps?

Anyway there are not "plenty of blacks who want to hold anyone who isn't black liable for reparations", let alone ANY who hold that belief. That's one of the lamest arguments I have ever seen you make and that's saying a lot.

Then you won't be taking it out of my paycheck.

Oh, you mean like they would at a company where you were working. Pull a little out of your bonus for the company to pay what it owes. Using taxes to pay what the government owes is not taking it out of YOUR paycheck. You don't pay taxes for each individual thing. You pay taxes. It becomes the government's money. And it is used to pay the government's bills.

Again, the government is liable for everything its done since its inception. Like a company, saying it ain't fair cuz I wasn't here then is not a valid argument, since it would make it impossible to ever hold an entity responsible for its mistakes. You've already pointed out that holding a company or entity liable is NOT THE SAME as holding you personally responsible. Glad we settled that.

Now we won't have to hear you bring up the boogeyman to explain why it's dangerous under the bed.

But you are or were a member of the US Govt though right? An officer of sorts in the military perhaps?

Gee, not during the Civil War...

Anyway there are not "plenty of blacks who want to hold anyone who isn't black liable for reparations", let alone ANY who hold that belief.

Sure there are. Why do you think Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are so popular when they say it?

I do not live in the USA, I live in Germany. However we do have quite a number of blacks, so I answer: They are often really beautiful. And then I stare and feel I am doing something inappropriate, then I force myself to look away, but can't really do that and this makes me feel as if I cheated on my bf. So laugh or not, their beauty and their accents (their French sounds much more pleasant than european French) is a problem for me.

But you are or were a member of the US Govt though right? An officer of sorts in the military perhaps?

Anyway there are not "plenty of blacks who want to hold anyone who isn't black liable for reparations", let alone ANY who hold that belief. That's one of the lamest arguments I have ever seen you make and that's saying a lot.

Actually, since he's being held no more personally responsible then he would be held responsible for being a stockholder in McDonald's if I sued McDonald's. His stock might fall and thus he might make a little less money, but that he didn't put the razorblade in the food doesn't invalidate the suit (so to speak).

Gee, not during the Civil War...



Sure there are. Why do you think Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are so popular when they say it?

Please quote them saying that ALL people who aren't black are responsible. I want to hear that.

Actually, since he's being held no more personally responsible then he would be held responsible for being a stockholder in McDonald's if I sued McDonald's. His stock might fall and thus he might make a little less money, but that he didn't put the razorblade in the food doesn't invalidate the suit (so to speak).

What I object to is blacks who have told me personally that I'm responsible for paying THEM even if my ancestors weren't even around in the US.

What I object to is blacks who have told me personally that I'm responsible for paying THEM even if my ancestors weren't even around in the US.

Oh, I see. Conveniently, you can't prove it. The ol' everyone says that argument. Never stop using that fallacy. It's not a terrible argument, no matter what anyone tells you.

Gee, not during the Civil War...

That wasn't part of your argument.

Sure there are. Why do you think Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton are so popular when they say it?

Show me a quote of one of them saying that

I do not live in the USA, I live in Germany. However we do have quite a number of blacks, so I answer: They are often really beautiful. And then I stare and feel I am doing something inappropriate, then I force myself to look away, but can't really do that and this makes me feel as if I cheated on my bf. So laugh or not, their beauty and their accents (their French sounds much more pleasant than european French) is a problem for me.

I'm sorry but that is adorable.

What I object to is blacks who have told me personally that I'm responsible for paying THEM even if my ancestors weren't even around in the US.

Okay, then object to THOSE blacks. Don't drag in the rest of us for their actions.

Okay, then object to THOSE blacks. Don't drag in the rest of us for their actions.

Remote Observer can't understand individuality until you try to lump him in with a group of people he would rather not associate with.

Okay, then object to THOSE blacks. Don't drag in the rest of us for their actions.

Well, clearly he must support reparations. He's said he ONLY objects if people actually blame him. Holding the government responsible for its actions is acceptable to him.

Actually, since he's being held no more personally responsible then he would be held responsible for being a stockholder in McDonald's if I sued McDonald's. His stock might fall and thus he might make a little less money, but that he didn't put the razorblade in the food doesn't invalidate the suit (so to speak).

Yeah, that is kinda what I was thinking.

Oh, you mean like they would at a company where you were working. Pull a little out of your bonus for the company to pay what it owes. Using taxes to pay what the government owes is not taking it out of YOUR paycheck. You don't pay taxes for each individual thing. You pay taxes. It becomes the government's money. And it is used to pay the government's bills.

Again, the government is liable for everything its done since its inception. Like a company, saying it ain't fair cuz I wasn't here then is not a valid argument, since it would make it impossible to ever hold an entity responsible for its mistakes. You've already pointed out that holding a company or entity liable is NOT THE SAME as holding you personally responsible. Glad we settled that.

Now we won't have to hear you bring up the boogeyman to explain why it's dangerous under the bed.

i think you're stretching the analogy there. Governments aren't at all like companies. They come and go. They're effectively just the mouthpieces of the people and since none of them were alive when it happened and none ofthe people they're representing were, then there's no way they can be held to account for it.

With a company it's entirely, totally different. The shareholders are liable for things that the company did in the past because they legally took that on when they bought the shares.

i think you're stretching the analogy there. Governments aren't at all like companies. They come and go. They're effectively just the mouthpieces of the people and since none of them were alive when it happened and none ofthe people they're representing were, then there's no way they can be held to account for it.

With a company it's entirely, totally different. The shareholders are liable for things that the company did in the past because they legally took that on when they bought the shares.

The government is just a legal organization just like a company. This government is still here and legally is just as much an entity as a company. You as a citizen are responsible for and to your government. You follow its rules, you join it. The fact that you didn't actively do this has never made any different. Otherwise, you could just declare that you didn't want to be American and stop paying taxes. Instead you have to actively leave or you are considered to have tacitly agreed to be a part of our "company".

Meanwhile, the government IS held accountable for itself. Otherwise how could we have a national debt? How could the government get sued?

I'm not racist, I hold opinions on induviduals alone, and anyone that is a racist is automatically filed about 2 notches lower on my likeable scale.

What I hate is the most racist induvidual on the planet as long as they belong to a minority, can call me, )a civil minded, open to opinions, freindly guy) a racist and everyone will take thier fucking side simply because I'm white!

I also hate almost nearly every group along the lines of the ACLU, NAACP type because all they do anymore is act ignorant and cause problems.

I also strongly hold the opinion that affermative action is not necesary. I don't mind having a job I apply for being taken by someone who is obviously more qualified than me... but when it is taken by someone because of thier race or nationality I get pissed off.

I'm not racist, I hold opinions on induviduals alone, and anyone that is a racist is automatically filed about 2 notches lower on my likeable scale.

What I hate is the most racist induvidual on the planet as long as they belong to a minority, can call me, )a civil minded, open to opinions, freindly guy) a racist and everyone will take thier fucking side simply because I'm white!

I also hate almost nearly every group along the lines of the ACLU, NAACP type because all they do anymore is act ignorant and cause problems.

I also strongly hold the opinion that affermative action is not necesary. I don't mind having a job I apply for being taken by someone who is obviously more qualified than me... but when it is taken by someone because of thier race or nationality I get pissed off.

Yeah, you don't have a racist bone in your body but you like to refer to the NAACP as a bunch of niggers.

Lord help us if there were any real racists around.

I'm not racist, I hold opinions on induviduals alone, and anyone that is a racist is automatically filed about 2 notches lower on my likeable scale.

What I hate is the most racist induvidual on the planet as long as they belong to a minority, can call me, )a civil minded, open to opinions, freindly guy) a racist and everyone will take thier fucking side simply because I'm white!

I also hate almost nearly every group along the lines of the ACLU, NAACP type because all they do anymore is act ignorant and cause problems.

I also strongly hold the opinion that affermative action is not necesary. I don't mind having a job I apply for being taken by someone who is obviously more qualified than me... but when it is taken by someone because of thier race or nationality I get pissed off.


Hmmm... first of all you claim to treat people as individuals but state the above (bolded). I think you'll find this is substantially untrue and you're quite guilty of generalizing badly here, and in support of a fairly common racist myth.

Second, I think you are simply parrotting the common "I'm white and oppressed" complaints. Affirmative action is not what you're describing. The ACLU is not the NAACP and the ACLU would be the first one defending you if you were wrongly accused of racism.

I only have trivial issues.

.
.
.
.
.
Al Sharpton
Jesse Jackson


And that's about it, really.

My thoughts exactly.

Oh, goody, we get to round up the usual scapegoats. How impressive.

I'm not racist, I hold opinions on induviduals alone, and anyone that is a racist is automatically filed about 2 notches lower on my likeable scale.

What I hate is the most racist induvidual on the planet as long as they belong to a minority, can call me, )a civil minded, open to opinions, freindly guy) a racist and everyone will take thier fucking side simply because I'm white!

I also hate almost nearly every group along the lines of the ACLU, NAACP type because all they do anymore is act ignorant and cause problems.

I also strongly hold the opinion that affermative action is not necesary. I don't mind having a job I apply for being taken by someone who is obviously more qualified than me... but when it is taken by someone because of thier race or nationality I get pissed off.

1) People don't usually call people racist for no reason. Not saying you're a racist, just that most sensible people tend not to listen to ignorant racist of any group. If people are listening to an ignorant racist non-white call you racist, maybe you should stop hanging around those people?

2)NAACP and groups similiar to them don't work because they use tactics and ideas that would have worked in the 60's, but not it todays world. Believe me, they are far more detrimental to Blacks than you. They are simply 'outdated'.

3) I too believe Affirmative action isn't totally nescessary. I only believe Affirmative action is nescessary in the case of businesses that are proven to have a history of not hiring people due to certain characteristics such as race, religion, sex, etc.

Oh, goody, we get to round up the usual scapegoats. How impressive.

Maybe it's because you've been debating so heavily as of late, but I think that was either a joke or someone actually saying "I only have a problem with these two assholes. Everyone else is fine. Seriously."

Oh, goody, we get to round up the usual scapegoats. How impressive.

What? They suck.

What? They suck.

QFT. Jackson and Sharpton are about a 9.0 on my jackass-o-meter. (Fred Phelps being a 10, of course. Falwell and Pat Roberson combined got an 11.)

What? They suck.

QFT. Jackson and Sharpton are about a 9.0 on my jackass-o-meter. (Fred Phelps being a 10, of course. Falwell and Pat Roberson combined got an 11.)

Really? Pray tell why. Especially as to Rev. Jackson. Try to be specific and be prepared to back up your assertions.

I wrote up a long post explaining my problem with the political orientation of much of the Black community.

But then I decided that there are probably better places to criticize reformist, pro-capitalist methods of tackling racism than a forum where the existence of racist discrimination against Blacks in the present day is openly questioned by otherwise rational people.

Really? Pray tell why. Especially as to Rev. Jackson. Try to be specific and be prepared to back up your assertions.

I have personal issues against Jackson. He happens to associate with some local politicians for whom I bear a very strong dislike, and has been known to give and receive "donations" from them. It's a local thing. Trust me.

I disagree with Al Sharpton politically, so he gets the distinction in the same way as President Bush
Lemme add something here -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Al_Sharpton#Accusations_of_racism.2C_homophobia.2C_and_bigotry

I don't think any of those incidents improved my view of the man. I'm sorry.

Were you just referring to those two, or should I explain Falwell, Phelps, and Roberson too?

Yeah, you don't have a racist bone in your body but you like to refer to the NAACP as a bunch of niggers.

Lord help us if there were any real racists around.

I never reffered to the NAACP as a bunch of niggers. I said I know someone who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored People. And I even went on to explain his reasoning in an attempt to prevent you from continued offense.

The man's name is Jerry Turner, we went to college together, he is black, we still keep in touch, we are still very good freinds, and we still occasionally hang out. He says that the NAACP has done nothing in the past 10 years to benefit the African American Community and much to harm it.

Protesting people's rights to freedom of speech/expression.
Supporting the ignorant people who believe they are owed reperations for something our ignorant and brutal (as per compared to modern society) ancestors did to them over 100 fucking years ago.
And generally making jackasses out of themselves.
He calls them Niggers Are Against Colored People

Where do you get me calling them niggers by telling the world what he said?

This is exactly the kind of uppity bullshit that I despise from people of all stripes. Get your head out of your ass and stop trying to push you racism shit on me. I will not stand for it; and if you were in the same room with me it is one of the few things that can come to blows.

3) I too believe Affirmative action isn't totally nescessary. I only believe Affirmative action is nescessary in the case of businesses that are proven to have a history of not hiring people due to certain characteristics such as race, religion, sex, etc.

I don't think affirmative action is the same as "No Adverse Impact" 4/5th rule and I agree that there should be an adverse impact rule in place because that does stop discrimination.

Really? Pray tell why. Especially as to Rev. Jackson. Try to be specific and be prepared to back up your assertions.

Their heads are funny shaped.

I have no problems, or complaints with the Black Community or any community for that matter...

I never reffered to the NAACP as a bunch of niggers. I said I know someone who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored People. And I even went on to explain his reasoning in an attempt to prevent you from continued offense.

The man's name is Jerry Turner, we went to college together, he is black, we still keep in touch, we are still very good freinds, and we still occasionally hang out. He says that the NAACP has done nothing in the past 10 years to benefit the African American Community and much to harm it.

Protesting people's rights to freedom of speech/expression.
Supporting the ignorant people who believe they are owed reperations for something our ignorant and brutal (as per compared to modern society) ancestors did to them over 100 fucking years ago.
And generally making jackasses out of themselves.
He calls them Niggers Are Against Colored People

Where do you get me calling them niggers by telling the world what he said?

This is exactly the kind of uppity bullshit that I despise from people of all stripes. Get your head out of your ass and stop trying to push you racism shit on me. I will not stand for it; and if you were in the same room with me it is one of the few things that can come to blows.

Uppity, huh? So you have demonstrated in your first post in the thread that you're happy to generalize about people, while claiming you don't. You've made several references that make it pretty clear that you can't help but let a little slip through, and you're suggesting that you'd kick TCT's ass if he were in the room.

You can't possibly think you're making a decent argument here, can you? I mean, you recognize that your slip is showing and you need to pull down that skirt, no? This is debate. You have to be cleaner than this if you expect to go up against TCT. Resorting to references to injuring him and complaining because he notices you just happen to be tarbrushing and supporting the use of racist terms (to the point of suggesting you'd injure him if he were in the room) is pretty sad.

Hmmm... first of all you claim to treat people as individuals but state the above (bolded). I think you'll find this is substantially untrue and you're quite guilty of generalizing badly here, and in support of a fairly common racist myth.


Not a myth, it happened at work a few days ago. I got an earful from everyone in the damn room about racism and civil rights, and its only the color of someone's skin. All I did was laugh at a joke made by a black co-worker at his expense. Black co-worker number 2 (ghetto culture, hates everyone, just looks for reasons to get into fights, god knows how he keeps his job, assinine, racist.. I can continue for about 4 more lines) immeditly pulls the race card and everyone joins his side, save for the guy who made the fucking joke who treid to explain; I got the cold shoulder from my girlfriend over the matter. Don't tell me its a myth.

Here's a tip - only if I'm an officer of the company - which I am not.

I believe that a very similar argument has been used by soldiers in most armies of conquest, over the course of history. I'm just sayin'.

Not a myth, it happened at work a few days ago. I got an earful from everyone in the damn room about racism and civil rights, and its only the color of someone's skin. All I did was laugh at a joke made by a black co-worker at his expense. Black co-worker number 2 (ghetto culture, hates everyone, just looks for reasons to get into fights, god knows how he keeps his job, assinine, racist.. I can continue for about 4 more lines) immeditly pulls the race card and everyone joins his side, save for the guy who made the fucking joke who treid to explain; I got the cold shoulder from my girlfriend over the matter. Don't tell me its a myth.

Almost everyone in the room and your girlfriend feels your actions were racist. Couldn't possibily be that you did or said something racist -- even unintentionally.

Nope. It must be a plot. I blame them niggers at the NAACP.

Not a myth, it happened at work a few days ago. I got an earful from everyone in the damn room about racism and civil rights, and its only the color of someone's skin. All I did was laugh at a joke made by a black co-worker at his expense. Black co-worker number 2 (ghetto culture, hates everyone, just looks for reasons to get into fights, god knows how he keeps his job, assinine, racist.. I can continue for about 4 more lines) immeditly pulls the race card and everyone joins his side, save for the guy who made the fucking joke who treid to explain; I got the cold shoulder from my girlfriend over the matter. Don't tell me its a myth.

Uh-huh. Interesting. I've worked all over the country. All different kinds of companies. All different kinds of people. Never been accused of racism. Ever. Not one time.

You have been accused multiple times according to you and "everyone believed them" and use your anecdotal evidence to claim a generalization is true.

Well, let's see what's more likely. That my experience is just a rare experience. That your experience is just a rare experience. Or the more logical that there is some factor that makes our experiences different. I'm going to go with the third.

What can I find that is different? You make generalistic attacks on various groups. You called a black man uppity and promoted the use of the word "******" to insult the NAACP. I've done neither. Yep, seems like I can find a logical reason that you're running into trouble and why people might believe such an accusation about you.

Does it occur to you that there is some value to examining your own place in your problems or is personal responsibility something you don't agree with?

I never reffered to the NAACP as a bunch of niggers. I said I know someone who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored People. And I even went on to explain his reasoning in an attempt to prevent you from continued offense.

The man's name is Jerry Turner, we went to college together, he is black, we still keep in touch, we are still very good freinds, and we still occasionally hang out. He says that the NAACP has done nothing in the past 10 years to benefit the African American Community and much to harm it.

Protesting people's rights to freedom of speech/expression.
Supporting the ignorant people who believe they are owed reperations for something our ignorant and brutal (as per compared to modern society) ancestors did to them over 100 fucking years ago.
And generally making jackasses out of themselves.
He calls them Niggers Are Against Colored People

Where do you get me calling them niggers by telling the world what he said?

This is exactly the kind of uppity bullshit that I despise from people of all stripes. Get your head out of your ass and stop trying to push you racism shit on me. I will not stand for it; and if you were in the same room with me it is one of the few things that can come to blows.

Just because you may have been repeating something a black person said doesn't mean it isn't a racist thing to say.

Just because you have a black friend doesn't mean that you can never commit an act of racism or say something racist.

I can't believe you complained about my "uppity bullshit." You just can't avoid unfortunate language, can you?

What I won't stand for is your nonsense and race-tinged speech.

Uppity, huh? So you have demonstrated in your first post in the thread that you're happy to generalize about people, while claiming you don't. You've made several references that make it pretty clear that you can't help but let a little slip through, and you're suggesting that you'd kick TCT's ass if he were in the room.

You can't possibly think you're making a decent argument here, can you? I mean, you recognize that your slip is showing and you need to pull down that skirt, no? This is debate. You have to be cleaner than this if you expect to go up against TCT. Resorting to references to injuring him and complaining because he notices you just happen to be tarbrushing and supporting the use of racist terms (to the point of suggesting you'd injure him if he were in the room) is pretty sad.

I said it could, I didn't say it would. I never threatend him, stop trying to read in between the lines and make me look like a horrible self centered induvidual that you want to prove someone is. I can get angry enough over racism to hit someone, hence the reason I give Klan rallies and such a wide birth, to me its almost as unforgivable as harming my family.

Where do I expressly say "I'm gonna hurt you!", go on, find it... I said that the issue can come to blows. So what if I didn't spend 2 hours typing it out to perfection? Are you going to sue me or something? I said it as I meant it.

If you can point out a direct threat, something that specifically states I mean some guy online that I don't even know undue harm. I'll make a public appology thread to all of NS and denounce myself as a horrible mean nasty, bigoted person.

if you were in the same room with me it is one of the few things that can come to blows is not a threat of violence, it is a statement of how strongly I feal about the statement he made toward me. Will you guys knock off the fucking flamebating and personal attacks against me now? I was too damn angry to make a clear and consice argument and did the best I could, for cryin gout loud I'm only human and bound to make mistakes in everything I do, especially in moments of passion.

I am not wrong here, I am merely defending myself and trying to make a statement.

Almost everyone in the room and your girlfriend feels your actions were racist. Couldn't possibily be that you did or said something racist -- even unintentionally.

Nope. It must be a plot. I blame them niggers at the NAACP.

I know I'm constantly getting called a racist by my girlfriend. Aren't you? It's what girlfriends do. It can't possibly be the result of people noticing a pattern.

By the way, I stood in a room full of people and repeated what Michael Richards said, and explained why I thought that while he was hideously in the wrong that some people were over-reacting and not once did I get accused of racism. There were some gasps when I quoted him, but not a single person accused me of being a racist. Perhaps it's because they knew I wasn't supporting his use of the word and that I was trying to show how shocking it was. However, had I had any history that suggested I might have intended it differently (particularly since I was defending him), I imagine the reaction would have been different.

People tend to take people's remarks in context. Our friend doesn't appear to want them to do that.

You called a black man uppity

Just for the record, I'm a white male. (And a member of the NAACP and ACLU).

Not that SaintB knew that when that comment was made.

Uh-huh. Interesting. I've worked all over the country. All different kinds of companies. All different kinds of people. Never been accused of racism. Ever. Not one time.

You have been accused multiple times according to you and "everyone believed them" and use your anecdotal evidence to claim a generalization is true.

Well, let's see what's more likely. That my experience is just a rare experience. That your experience is just a rare experience. Or the more logical that there is some factor that makes our experiences different. I'm going to go with the third.

What can I find that is different? You make generalistic attacks on various groups. You called a black man uppity and promoted the use of the word "******" to insult the NAACP. I've done neither. Yep, seems like I can find a logical reason that you're running into trouble and why people might believe such an accusation about you.

Does it occur to you that there is some value to examining your own place in your problems or is personal responsibility something you don't agree with?


Same here. I believe that the only time I've ever been called racist was by Whispering Eves Remote Kimchi Observer Legs Online. I have todl racist jokes though but only to the people of the race I was jokign about and it's never been taken as me actually believing it as far as I am aware.

Almost everyone in the room and your girlfriend feels your actions were racist. Couldn't possibily be that you did or said something racist -- even unintentionally.

Nope. It must be a plot. I blame them niggers at the NAACP.

I laughed at a joke, the rest was accusations, much like I'm being subjected too here. God forbid I have a sense of humor and found the joke amusing. God forbid a guy whom I have no problems with looks at the sound board and says "Its because I'm black ain't it!" and then grins at me. Jesus Lord no, how bad of me.

I said it could, I didn't say it would. I never threatend him, stop trying to read in between the lines and make me look like a horrible self centered induvidual that you want to prove someone is. I can get angry enough over racism to hit someone, hence the reason I give Klan rallies and such a wide birth, to me its almost as unforgivable as harming my family.

Where do I expressly say "I'm gonna hurt you!", go on, find it... I said that the issue can come to blows. So what if I didn't spend 2 hours typing it out to perfection? Are you going to sue me or something? I said it as I meant it.

If you can point out a direct threat, something that specifically states I mean some guy online that I don't even know undue harm. I'll make a public appology thread to all of NS and denounce myself as a horrible mean nasty, bigoted person.

The fact that it's not a direct threat is why it's not reported. That doesn't excuse it. I didn't call you any names so kindly pocket the strawman and save him for another argument. You've made it clear that you want to avoid debate by making references that draw people out of the debate. An indirect threat, calling him uppity, using anecdotal evidence about how you're being oppressed. If you don't want to debate, I don't mind. But you'll find that's what this forum is for.



is not a threat of violence, it is a statement of how strongly I feal about the statement he made toward me. Will you guys knock off the fucking flamebating and personal attacks against me now? I was too damn angry to make a clear and consice argument and did the best I could, for cryin gout loud I'm only human and bound to make mistakes in everything I do, especially in moments of passion.

I am not wrong here, I am merely defending myself and trying to make a statement.

So now we're flamebaiting you because we noticed that you promoted the use of the word ****** to attack the NAACP, you generalized about "everybody" while claiming to respect the individual and that you made an indirect threat of violence?

If you're angry, take a breath. I don't want you to be, nor does TCT. Step away, give yourself time and then come back. But I wonder why you're so angry? Are you afraid that maybe we have a point?

Then you won't be taking it out of my paycheck.NO, Jocabia is NOT going to take if from your Paycheck.

I have noticed a number of people voicing dissatisfaction with certain elements of the black community recently. These things include, but are not constrained to:
1) Black people have more privileges than whites.
2) Black people are more racist than whites in truth.
3) Blacks whine & complain about imagined handicaps in our society.

So I was thinking that maybe you could post any problems(nothing ignorant) you have with the black community, and we could discuss them. I invite all races and peoples into this discussion.

And please, no flaming or mocking. Lets have a nice, civilized discussion. Also, no racism.

First the subject is "Racist" so dont ask for no racism. It may be a positive "Racist" subject but race is the issue so it is a "Racist" subject.

As for Black America.
I beef with the prolific growth of the Defeatist Leaders who teach Blacks to be victims, to hold out their hands and wait to be picked up instead of Positive Affirmation of the great potential of the New Black Culture.

American Blacks are some of hte most influential people on the earth yet they make up a mere 12% of the US population.

That makes them a powerful group who should get up and stand up.

I lived in a Detroit housing project, I dont have black friends I have friends who happen to be Black. They dont use words like ******, or the more asinine "Nigga" in reference to themselves or others. I use the word more then they do because growing up in black community it was the universal exclamation. Everyone was a ******, or my nigga, the unco-operative sparkplug was being a ******, the Polish butcher drunk on his lawn was a crazy ******, ****** ****** ******.

As I became more familr with my own culture and the culture of Balck America I was privileged to meet Proud Positive BLack Americans who dont get held down, they dont get beat down, they dont defame themselves or their brothers or their cousins(whites, hispanic, asian) by demeaning them with labels...i have taken the practice of using the term cousin to refer to thsoe outside my race as iI found it refreshing to see that no matter who in the world they would speak of it was always family.

No, these minority individuals who have remained my friends are not blind to racial distinctions either. They are Black, and happy to be so. They will tell you they are happy. They will tell you they are dicriminated against...and it wont be a complaint...it will merely be statement of fact...because they rise above.

I want to see that in Black Culture once again.
I want to Al sharpton tremble before a humble man who isnt a victim and doesnt need him telling him he is one...just because of the bigotry of someone else.

I want to see Malcolm X boulevard be a safe street in my city because the Pluralistic Values of that man's later life combined with his unwavering commmitment to personal greatness and the outward expression of his spiritual growth wereNOT put in the backseat to the duanting task of confronting an unfair and unjust world.

I want to see men like Juan Williams and Bill Cosby gain the respect they deserve for calling to question the common practices of the Black American...the complacent behaviors and lazy indifference to saving ones self from ones self.

Motherfucker I want see a day when you can walk through Detroit or Atlanta not hear the word ******, Nigga, Nig come from anyones mouth or out of anyones stereo.

The only things can be done to improve the plight of Black America is an issue of Culture.

Shit!
The world waits with baited breath from the next hip hop trend, the next sharp black man in a suit teaching the youth what style is for every continenet. Dont let the Black culture be represented by Dope Niggas running dem hos...let it be by Cutting Edge Kings and Queens with dignity and respect.

Just for the record, I'm a white male. (And a member of the NAACP and ACLU).

Not that SaintB knew that when that comment was made.

Ha. Honestly, I've always assumed you were black. Good ol' stereotypes, they never stop making one look stupid.

I laughed at a joke, the rest was accusations, much like I'm being subjected too here. God forbid I have a sense of humor and found the joke amusing. God forbid a guy whom I have no problems with looks at the sound board and says "Its because I'm black ain't it!" and then grins at me. Jesus Lord no, how bad of me.

Having a sense of humour isn't necessarily why you find a joke amusing. I've been told to my face that I have no sense of humour for not finding certain things funny ("What do you do if your dishwasher stops working? Slap the bitch", sticks in my mind) - but I thnk it's actually because I'm not an asshat.

I don't have a sense of humour either, but that's a different argument.

Same here. I believe that the only time I've ever been called racist was by Whispering Eves Remote Kimchi Observer Legs Online. I have todl racist jokes though but only to the people of the race I was jokign about and it's never been taken as me actually believing it as far as I am aware.

Much of my family is of various races. I've made jokes about being white, about some of my family being black, etc. They make jokes about how I like neck bones and greens. There is also a fair share of gay jokes (becauses I look exactly like my sister and my friend ended up married to her. Think about it.). They are making fun of the stereotypes not promoting them. It's about how silly it is that people actually believe that nonsense, or would care if it were true (for example, if my brother-in-law was attracted to me). I don't think that jokes have to be off-limits. I do think that they have to be responsible, and I'll bet money we've both crossed that line a time or two.

They will tell you they are dicriminated against...and it wont be a complaint...it will merely be statement of fact...because they rise above.

This statement stood out for me. I think it speaks for itself.

The only things can be done to improve the plight of Black America is an issue of Culture.

Their culture, of course. Their behavior. Their fault.

Thus, "personal responsibility"... for them.

Having a sense of humour isn't necessarily why you find a joke amusing. I've been told to my face that I have no sense of humour for not finding certain things funny ("What do you do if your dishwasher stops working? Slap the bitch", sticks in my mind) - but I thnk it's actually because I'm not an asshat.

I don't have a sense of humour either, but that's a different argument.

That's odd. When you were here I spent most of my time laughing at you.

Ha. Honestly, I've always assumed you were black. Good ol' stereotypes, they never stop making one look stupid.

Suppose you agree that he can't actually be black, not having the right colour skin - which is nobody's fault, not even the Romans' - but that he can have the right to be black?

NO, Jocabia is NOT going to take if from your Paycheck.Your Gov will.
Reparations are fair, get over it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYBqBIf_eHk <-- "No Apologies for Slavery"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bqDxtI4Lvzs <-- "The Hazzards of White Guilt"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OGzV0wEJfAQ <-- "Fun With Sterotypes"

I love this guy ... in a non-homosexual way. Worth the watch if you ask me.

Jocabia and Cat Tribe
Now that I'm more calmed down. ****** is a word, just simply a word. When I said I know a guy who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored Peoples I was not condoneing the use of the word, merely stating what someone else said. You might have taken it to mean that was my opinion, but if it was I would have supported it with further statements. I do not condone racism, I do not condone the use of the race card, I do not appreciate other people bringing it up, and I most certainly do not appreciate it when people accuse me of any of the three. I keep my accusations to myself; I'd appreciate it if people would keep any accusations toward me to themselves. If I percieve I am being attacked, I respond in kind; I percieved your jabs as attacks, as it seems you percieved my posts as attacks. I merely stated an opinion as asked in my first post, thats what I beleive the problems are. Honestly, you two only served to set the whole race card opinion even harder and anger me in the process.

Appologies for anything I said you found offensive. I'd like those sentiments returned. We do not know each other, I'm sure you are both nice calm and freindly people in your own right and we all have merely gotten off on the wrong foot. Err... maybe it would be... no can't think of anything cleverly stupid to finsih with.

Jocabia and Cat Tribe
Now that I'm more calmed down. ****** is a word, just simply a word. When I said I know a guy who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored Peoples I was not condoneing the use of the word, merely stating what someone else said. You might have taken it to mean that was my opinion, but if it was I would have supported it with further statements. I do not condone racism, I do not condone the use of the race card, I do not appreciate other people bringing it up, and I most certainly do not appreciate it when people accuse me of any of the three. I keep my accusations to myself; I'd appreciate it if people would keep any accusations toward me to themselves. If I percieve I am being attacked, I respond in kind; I percieved your jabs as attacks, as it seems you percieved my posts as attacks. I merely stated an opinion as asked in my first post, thats what I beleive the problems are. Honestly, you two only served to set the whole race card opinion even harder and anger me in the process.

Appologies for anything I said you found offensive. I'd like those sentiments returned. We do not know each other, I'm sure you are both nice calm and freindly people in your own right and we all have merely gotten off on the wrong foot. Err... maybe it would be... no can't think of anything cleverly stupid to finsih with.

This statement stood out for me. I think it speaks for itself.



Their culture, of course. Their behavior. Their fault.

Thus, "personal responsibility"... for them.

Clearify for me?

I am a little slow with issues unless hit with a club.
Do you find offensive, worng, right, or do just disagree with me...ummm gimme something here man.

But to personal repsonsibilty...yes the OP was asking about Black America. I consider BLack America to be very much its own culture, a young culture but a culture non the less and wholly American. Perhaps the MOST influential part of America. SO I beleive that Balck Americans have to take personal responsibilty far more seriously then they are been led to by this culture of victimazation.

Does that mean I dont think everyone should take personal responsibiltiy seriously? No, of course eveyone should. But Black America suffered a seriosu stall at the end of the civil rights movement...because it did indeed end.

Juan Williams I think most eloquent expresses my exact feelings on the issue.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5618023

The audio on the link is some of the best stuff to hear I have yet to purchase his book...but it is on my list. H eis perhaps my favorite journalist.

1) I agree gangsta culture is wrong. Its a huge blight on the black community that makes us look ignorant, violent, & immoral.

It makes anyone, regardless of skin colour, look stupid, violent, etc. So... let's ban gangsta culture? :p

Last I checked reparations was something asked of the government.

Can one of you enlighten a non-USA person about the 'reparations' you speak of? To me the word is familiar from war reparations, but how is it used in this context? English isn't my native language either, so don't call me stupid. :p

Can one of you enlighten a non-USA person about the 'reparations' you speak of?

Reparations for slavery.

Jocabia and Cat Tribe
Now that I'm more calmed down. ****** is a word, just simply a word. When I said I know a guy who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored Peoples I was not condoneing the use of the word, merely stating what someone else said. You might have taken it to mean that was my opinion, but if it was I would have supported it with further statements. I do not condone racism, I do not condone the use of the race card, I do not appreciate other people bringing it up, and I most certainly do not appreciate it when people accuse me of any of the three. I keep my accusations to myself; I'd appreciate it if people would keep any accusations toward me to themselves. If I percieve I am being attacked, I respond in kind; I percieved your jabs as attacks, as it seems you percieved my posts as attacks. I merely stated an opinion as asked in my first post, thats what I beleive the problems are. Honestly, you two only served to set the whole race card opinion even harder and anger me in the process.

Appologies for anything I said you found offensive. I'd like those sentiments returned. We do not know each other, I'm sure you are both nice calm and freindly people in your own right and we all have merely gotten off on the wrong foot. Err... maybe it would be... no can't think of anything cleverly stupid to finsih with.

And of course, just like last time when I calm down and try to be reasonable they leave and continue to harbor hard feelings. Hopefully one or both have this thread subscribed because I am getting tired of this constant animosity.

1) People don't usually call people racist for no reason.

I admit having racist thoughts and predispositions (not against black people, though... not enough of them living here for me to treat them as a group :p), but I try my darnedest best never to act on those thoughts because I try to remain a civil person to all nationalities... as long as they respond the same.

Can I be racist towards my own race? :confused: Pretty please? :D

If im not mistaken, my own country, that of the UK recently said "sorry" to the black community for slavery...

To me that is just plain idiotic, our generation have nothing to attone for.

Anyway, i would like to share somthing i have been thinking about, most people in my school and community have obviously had a bad upbringing, their are culprits from all ethnic groups, and frankly this worries me.

I would also like to point out that in the majority of cases, the offenders in terms of crime/trouble causing are members of specific groups of people within certain ethnic groups.

Furthermore i would like to say that this may be a biased opinion because my area has an unusualy high percentage of ethic minoritys living there (Walthamstow, London) so it increases the possibility of a certain ethnic group commiting more crimes.

Anyway, Rock music is great, but all down to its roots in Blues, which comes straight from black culture...which is rather relevent to the discussion

Reparations for slavery.

But that was hundreds of years ago...? :confused: :confused:

Do you find offensive, worng, right, or do just disagree with me...ummm gimme something here man.

I am long past being offended by what people say in race threads on NS.

But I disagree very much with you.

But to personal repsonsibilty...yes the OP was asking about Black America. I consider BLack America to be very much its own culture, a young culture but a culture non the less and wholly American. Perhaps the MOST influential part of America. SO I beleive that Balck Americans have to take personal responsibilty far more seriously then they are been led to by this culture of victimazation.

I think "Black America" should stop asking whites to guarantee them justice and equality. It's a tactic that's clearly failed, since whites have done nothing of the sort, and it's been four hundred years already.

Smashing white privilege is a task for direct revolutionary action by those oppressed by it: it will not be accomplished otherwise.

So we agree, sort of... from opposite perspectives.

Does that mean I dont think everyone should take personal responsibiltiy seriously? No, of course eveyone should. But Black America suffered a seriosu stall at the end of the civil rights movement...because it did indeed end.

Yes, the Black liberation movement has stalled since the Civil Rights Movement.

Primarily because much of its analysis was too limited, and the groups that began to move beyond those limitations, like the other radical groups of the late '60s and early '70s, failed to establish enough of a popular base and instead collapsed from internal ruptures and state repression.

Juan Williams I think most eloquent expresses my exact feelings on the issue.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5618023

These are distinctly different sorts of "self-empowerment."

The self-empowerment of the Civil Rights Movement, the self-empowerment of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and W.E.B DuBois, fundamentally involves collective self-empowerment against oppression. That's the self-empowerment I advocate.

The self-empowerment you seem to be advocating is of a different sort, epitomized in your observation that discrimination becomes a "fact", not a "complaint." It ignores social context; it fails to be critical, to advocate real, broad-based change. Instead it advocates a focus on yourself, a demand that YOU change YOUR situation within the existing political and economic frameworks, instead of complaining about them, rejecting them, trying to change them. (Because that, after all, would deny "personal responsibility"... right?)

That kind of "self-empowerment" would have had Blacks meekly cooperating with segregation, not rebelling against it.

But that was hundreds of years ago...? :confused: :confused:

And the proposals for them in the 1860s weren't implemented. And the harm slavery caused, among with the many other forms of racism that Blacks have suffered and continue to suffer until this day, continues to be at the root of this country's race problem.

If im not mistaken, my own country, that of the UK recently said "sorry" to the black community for slavery...
To me that is just plain idiotic, our generation have nothing to attone for.

Same goes for Germany apologizing jews for the genocide during 2nd World War. It's probably no coincidence that in a study where people's patriotic feelings and their feelings of their homeland were asked from people in the EU, that Germany came last on the "are you proud to be a citizen of your own country?" category.

The legacy of guilt and shame never leads to anything good. Ever.

electronic is superior to your inferior rap music (are there actually good rappers out there who don't talk of how much stuff they have and how bad the life is in X street?)

http://frontalot.com/index.php/

Here's my problem: Members of the black community are less likely to get sunburned than me. How dare they!?!?!?! =)

I don't have a problem with blacks.
I have a problem with blacks who have a problem with whites and morality.
The so-called 'race card' argument, for example. I hate it when people are racist, but likewise I dislike it when blacks seem to pull the all-powerful race card even when it's not correct (an abusive black member of staff being fired and his then blaming it on racism, for example).

Just as I don't have a problem with feminists; I have a problem with so-called 'Feminazis'.

Nor do I have a problem with patriots; I have a problem with nationalists.

I have problems with extremes. That's all.

Here's my problem: Members of the black community are less likely to get sunburned than me. How dare they!?!?!?! =)

Not to mention it's often hard to tell if they're blushing... it's unfair! XD

These are distinctly different sorts of "self-empowerment."

The self-empowerment of the Civil Rights Movement, the self-empowerment of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and W.E.B DuBois, fundamentally involves collective self-empowerment against oppression. That's the self-empowerment I advocate.

The self-empowerment you seem to be advocating is of a different sort, epitomized in your observation that discrimination becomes a "fact", not a "complaint." It ignores social context; it fails to be critical, to advocate real, broad-based change. Instead it advocates a focus on yourself, a demand that YOU change YOUR situation within the existing political and economic frameworks, instead of complaining about them, rejecting them, trying to change them. (Because that, after all, would deny "personal responsibility"... right?)

That kind of "self-empowerment" would have had Blacks meekly cooperating with segregation, not rebelling against it.

Ahhhh, see which is why i keep Juan around.
I am far worse with words then he is.
Fundamentally it was reading and listening to Juan Williams over the year that directly shaped my opinion.

I have found no point where i have disagreed with him on BLack empowerment. So where you see a difference take it as my poor ability at self expression.
My main problem and issue two fold.
One. I have BLack family.
Two. WHere I grew up instilled a direct connetion for me to BLack Culture. I was never some mealy mouthed suburban visiting the inner city. I was the "White Kid" I didnt know anything any different.
So entering the work force and indeed other educational institutions carried a stigma for me because I expected to be discriminated against...and I perceived it. Becuase I was right there when my peers were being taught tthat they would be discriminated against. I was one of them we were the same.
Indeed often times early on I found myslef receiving odd treatment because someone read where I wnet to school or what my address was. My prefessional speech was horrible, though not ebonics...I was white and in my day white people trying to sound black was insulting. Now I find the whole ebonic issue insulting---I relate to a lack of proper public school equality in the country.

Anyway, I am just not that good at being delicate. SO if I seem less ten sensitive...I am.
Because unlike most white people I have been exactly where these people are talking about.

I am no longer, and I know plenty of BLacks who arent either and it was done soley by their own will and not some hand out. There were handout available, they didnt take them.

The crutches in our society have cripple Black America as well...but that is another post.

So where you see a difference take it as my poor ability at self expression.

Um, he makes the exact same error that you do.

He glorifies and points to the progress of self-empowerment, but he fails to realize that the sort of "self-empowerment" he references is not the same as the "self-empowerment" he advocates.

I have a problem with some of the 'victim' mentality that some blacks (and some whites) seem to display. No matter how good their life is, and no matter how accessible they are to the opportunities that are presented to them, (and I do mean accessible) they always find problems and they always find a way to blame it on someone else. I mean God forbid they look at themselves, because they went through 400 years of shit, so they don't have to. Of course this also goes hand in hand with how some blacks won't try to improve themselves because it's not 'black', and they're acting 'white'. Yea, great job, lets stay in the ghetto because dammit, it's the black thing to do.

I also would like to burn Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton at the stakes.

Um, he makes the exact same error that you do.

He glorifies and points to the progress of self-empowerment, but he fails to realize that the sort of "self-empowerment" he references is not the same as the "self-empowerment" he advocates.

Well then I dont follow.
I dont see how it isnt, I realize you might get tired of long winded posts but disect it if you have the time.

Since you actually have someone who is listening and not just waiting to make their next point...break down what you mean for the slow guy.

I dont see how it isnt

"These are distinctly different sorts of "self-empowerment."

The self-empowerment of the Civil Rights Movement, the self-empowerment of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and W.E.B DuBois, fundamentally involves collective self-empowerment against oppression. That's the self-empowerment I advocate.

The self-empowerment you seem to be advocating is of a different sort, epitomized in your observation that discrimination becomes a "fact", not a "complaint." It ignores social context; it fails to be critical, to advocate real, broad-based change. Instead it advocates a focus on yourself, a demand that YOU change YOUR situation within the existing political and economic frameworks, instead of complaining about them, rejecting them, trying to change them. (Because that, after all, would deny "personal responsibility"... right?)

That kind of "self-empowerment" would have had Blacks meekly cooperating with segregation, not rebelling against it."

- Me, forty minutes ago

I have noticed a number of people voicing dissatisfaction with certain elements of the black community recently. These things include, but are not constrained to:
1) Black people have more privileges than whites.

They do in the sense of being more able to get financial help from the government than whites can because the government is biased in that aspect.

2) Black people are more racist than whites in truth.

That is true, because they have been miseducated by our society, educational systems, the news media, and the 'justice system' into believing that white people are the cause of all the problems the black people have, and that no matter what a white person does, he's 'oppressing' blacks and should be 'punished' for it, or if he's not oppressing them himself, then his ancestors did and he should be held accountable for their deeds just as if he committed them himself.

The above entities (society, educ. systems, the media, and the 'justice system') are of the mindset that white people are 'evil oppressors' and should be punished for being white or being descendents of slave owners, whereas blacks should be allowed to take (steal, swindle, shoplift, whatever you wanna call it)whatever they want from white people and white-owned businesses in the name of 'social justice'.

3) Blacks whine & complain about imagined handicaps in our society.


Yes they do, because they have been brainwashed into believing that because they're black, it's not their fault, that the white man made them do it.

er...

1) gangster culture
2) rap
3) they can call someone and naughty word and I can't :(
4) race card (doesn't work if your white for some reason)

The race card doesn't work for white people because our society, public educational systems, the news media, and the 'justice system' (hereinafter "the Fourth Estate") is biased in favor of blacks and against whites. That's why OJ Simpson got away with killing his wife, and also because:
2. He's a Hollywood celebrity
3. The jurors didn't understand the concept of DNA
4. The black community in Los Angeles threatened more 'riots' if OJ was found guilty.

1) I agree, white people aren't to blame for blacks killing other blacks. Most blacks don't simply say 'it's whitey's fault' either, most blame it on poverty.

2) The reparations arguement is boring, so let me sum it up for all the caucasians who are so scared off reparations and all the African-Americans who are so for it:

It Will Never Happen.

Right. I hate it that blacks got mistreated back in the 19th century, but (and listen carefully - I will talk in capital letters so as not to be misunderstood):
1. I PERSONALLY DO NOT OWN, HAVE NEVER OWNED, AND DO NOT INTEND TO OWN, ANY SLAVES OF ANY RACE.

2. I PERSONALLY DID NOT COMMIT ANY OF THE RACIAL ATROCITIES THAT OCCURRED IN THE 19TH OR 20TH CENTURIES, THOUGH I DO NOT APPROVE OF OR CONDONE THEM.

3. I DO NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANY OF MY ANCESTORS BEING SLAVE OWNERS.

4. I DO NOT ACCEPT, AND SHOULD NOT BE CHARGED WITH, RESPONSIBILITY FOR WHAT 19TH CENTURY SLAVE-OWNING WHITES DID, BECAUSE I WAS NOT ONE OF THEM, AND IN FACT NOT EVEN MY GRANDPARENTS, LET ALONE MYSELF, WERE NOT AROUND BACK THEN.

5. YOU MAY THINK THAT I 'OWE' YOU SOMETHING, BUT YOU ARE MISTAKEN: I OWE YOU NOTHING WHATSOEVER, AND I WILL DENY ANY AND ALL REQUESTS AND ESPECIALLY 'DEMANDS' FOR ANY 'REPARATIONS', AND IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT, THAT'S YOUR PROBLEM, NOT MINE.

Rap music.

Yes they do, because they have been brainwashed into believing that because they're black, it's not their fault, that the white man made them do it.

This notion is indicative of a prominent trend in the way black statements and views are understood: they are the babbling of infants and sheep whose content is not worthy of any direct attention. Self-evidently nonsensical, at most it calls for "explanation" as to why anyone would be so stupid as to say it.

Unless, of course, the statements happen to reinforce the perspective and ideology of white privilege. In which case they are wisdom handed down from God, and clear proof that one is right. "After all, a black person said it!"

"These are distinctly different sorts of "self-empowerment."

The self-empowerment of the Civil Rights Movement, the self-empowerment of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and W.E.B DuBois, fundamentally involves collective self-empowerment against oppression. That's the self-empowerment I advocate.

The self-empowerment you seem to be advocating is of a different sort, epitomized in your observation that discrimination becomes a "fact", not a "complaint." It ignores social context; it fails to be critical, to advocate real, broad-based change. Instead it advocates a focus on yourself, a demand that YOU change YOUR situation within the existing political and economic frameworks, instead of complaining about them, rejecting them, trying to change them. (Because that, after all, would deny "personal responsibility"... right?)

That kind of "self-empowerment" would have had Blacks meekly cooperating with segregation, not rebelling against it."

- Me, forty minutes ago

Its like that.

Discrimination is a fact, why? You can not kill racism. There will always be people who can't see past the "Other" of another person. Nothing will ever change that.

The Sefl Empowerment of of King, and Malcolm recognized that fact. They realized the futility of attempting to make others recognize the equality of their fellow mean. That to get an equal share they had to take an equal share, I dont of course mean through force of arms but through action and not empty words and complaints.

Self Empowerment involves community ownership, education, re-education of concepts of dignity, family, self respect, and respect for the ideas of Law, and Civil rights.

Those things are the begining of a movement to shift Black culture from that of victims to Self Empowered doers.

Those are my opinions and the some ideas of Malcolm and King.
Organization, Dignity, Solidarity.

Leadership through example.
Painful and Honest introspection.

Not feeble mouth crooked spined finger pointing.

Or empty headed violence.

So no, you 40 minutes made no more sense then you now.
Because I dont know what other kind of self empowerment there is beyond taking responsibilty for your situation and fixing it.

Systemic racism is no longer an excuse, plenty of successful Blacks prove that.

There is no whte Jackboot on the Black man's neck anymore.
If it is the point that currently the majority of problems in Black Culture in America are COMPLETELY self imposed, then yes you and I disagree.

But my definition of self empowerment isnt crippling to Blacks as you would suggest. But then White Apologists often want to remain the center of the debate. Adding to the problems of Black Society rather allowing them to be repaired.

People like you are the problem, not the solution. You would have Blacks meekly waiting for the white man to change rather then changing his own situation.

Only when it ceases to be everyone else's fault and people have to start accepting that they are where they have allowed themselves to be will anything change.

Black people can wear more intense and colourful makeup than me. [/angry]

This will all get sorted out once the Hispanics take over. :)

Damn, so much bullshit...

Why don't people accept that everyone is different in appearence but that we're all human beings?

To hell with black, white, asian, hispanic etc.!

The Sefl Empowerment of of King, and Malcolm recognized that fact. They realized the futility of attempting to make others recognize the equality of their fellow mean. That to get an equal share they had to take an equal share, I dont of course mean through force of arms but through action and not empty words and complaints.

Action is rooted in complaint.

You must complain, you must reject and protest what is, before you can change it to what ought to be.

Those are my opinions and the some ideas of Malcolm and King.
Organization, Dignity, Solidarity.

Yes, with an explicit political context.

They wanted organization and solidarity to attack racist institutions: because they recognized their role in the oppression of Blacks.

This is the exact opposite of your approach. You want Blacks to ignore the role of institutions in their oppression - to blame themselves instead.

That is not self-empowerment, not genuine self-empowerment. It is meek servility to institutions: they are good, so therefore I must be bad.

Genuine self-empowerment says: "I am a human. I am their equal. I am not bad. If they treat me poorly and unfairly, it is they, not me, who are bad, and we must struggle against them."

Because I dont know what other kind of self empowerment there is beyond taking responsibilty for your situation and fixing it.

There are different kinds of "taking responsibility for your situation and fixing it."

The sort of "taking responsibility" of the Civil Rights Movement was to recognize that racist laws would not go away on their own, that blacks had the power to destroy them, and that blacks had to exercise this power to get them to go away.

The sort of "taking responsibility" you advocate involves ignoring racist laws, and instead trying to improve oneself in that framework.

That is not "fixing" the problem. It is, at best, coping with it - and coping with it despite the fact that millions of others suffer from it, and your escape will not help them in the least.

Systemic racism is no longer an excuse, plenty of successful Blacks prove that.

No, they don't.

There have been successful Blacks since 1865... even before, if you count people like Frederick Douglas.

That does not prove the non-existence of systemic racism, or the insignificance of it.

But my definition of self empowerment isnt crippling to Blacks as you would suggest.

Yes, it is crippling.

It does not involve solving the problem: white privilege, its legacy, and its enduring presence. It involves ignoring the problem.

But then White Apologists often want to remain the center of the debate.

I am not White.

People like you are the problem, not the solution. You would have Blacks meekly waiting for the white man to change rather then changing his own situation.

Um, this is a position that I wholeheartedly reject.

I advocate revolutionary direct action, not liberal reformist acceptance of the current distribution of power. (Though certainly I prefer liberal attempts at reforming the system to the denial that the system needs changing at all.)

Black people can wear more intense and colourful makeup than me. [/angry]

Yes, but nobody notices when they do.

I'm sorry, short of lipstick, it's totally innoticable.

Also. I'm sorry. But I have to say this. If you are not white, do not dye your hair blonde. It looks fucking awful.

In fact, even if you are white, 90% of the time you shouldn't dye your hair blonde. It just doesn't look great.

Here's a tip. If I'm a member of a company I'm a part of everything that company does and has done as long as I remain a part of it. The government existed during slavery, whether you did or your ancestors were here is irrelevant.

That said, reparations are not going to happen. It's not even that popular.
The problem I see is that
A) you are born into the company
B) you can be forced to pay to this company before you are legally allowed to choose on your own to leave it

And please, no flaming or mocking. Lets have a nice, civilized discussion. Also, no racism.

To say you have a "problem" with the black community is racist, so it's difficult to comply.

And of course, just like last time when I calm down and try to be reasonable they leave and continue to harbor hard feelings. Hopefully one or both have this thread subscribed because I am getting tired of this constant animosity.

Calm down, buckaroo. I'm so sorry that my RL interferes with your posting schedule.

For the record, "last time" I left the forums for about an hour or two for a doctor's appointment and posted a lengthy reply when I returned. You never came back to the thread.

Jocabia and Cat Tribe
Now that I'm more calmed down. ****** is a word, just simply a word.

****** is a more than simply a word. It is a nasty epithet with a horrorific history. You shouldn't throw it around casually. Your comfort with doing so is exactly what put you in my cross-hairs to begin with.

Moreover, you directed the epithet at a venerable civil rights group. Calling the NAACP "niggers."

Nor did you apologize or back down from the epithet last time. (links below)


When I said I know a guy who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored Peoples I was not condoneing the use of the word, merely stating what someone else said.

As I've explained, this isn't an excuse for racist sentiments.

And you were doing more than merely stating what someone else said without condoning it. You were passing it on with humorous approval.

link (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12620501&postcount=55),

You subsequently forcefully defended that labeling of the NAACP. link (http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showpost.php?p=12620641&postcount=60)

You might have taken it to mean that was my opinion, but if it was I would have supported it with further statements.

Funny, but (as shown in the above link) you did argue in support of the statement. That must mean it was your opinion despite your current backtracking.

I do not condone racism, I do not condone the use of the race card, I do not appreciate other people bringing it up, and I most certainly do not appreciate it when people accuse me of any of the three. I keep my accusations to myself; I'd appreciate it if people would keep any accusations toward me to themselves. If I percieve I am being attacked, I respond in kind; I percieved your jabs as attacks, as it seems you percieved my posts as attacks. I merely stated an opinion as asked in my first post, thats what I beleive the problems are. Honestly, you two only served to set the whole race card opinion even harder and anger me in the process.

I am glad that you do not mean to condone racism or saying anything racist.

What you need to face is that you nonetheless have used racist language. Given your other arguments in these forums and your own anecdote about the feelings of your co-workers and girlfriend, you aren't really a stranger to racist thoughts.

The fact that you raise the drawbridge when attacked for your sentiments isn't surprising, but calling you to the carpet for what you have said is not merely playing the "race card."

Appologies for anything I said you found offensive. I'd like those sentiments returned. We do not know each other, I'm sure you are both nice calm and freindly people in your own right and we all have merely gotten off on the wrong foot. Err... maybe it would be... no can't think of anything cleverly stupid to finsih with.

If you are truly sorry for having used racist language, then I accept your apology. But your equivocation about it lessens then strength of your apology.

I don't have anything for which to apologize. I am sorry if that disappoints you.

"These are distinctly different sorts of "self-empowerment."

The self-empowerment of the Civil Rights Movement, the self-empowerment of Martin Luther King, Malcolm X, and W.E.B DuBois, fundamentally involves collective self-empowerment against oppression. That's the self-empowerment I advocate.

The self-empowerment you seem to be advocating is of a different sort, epitomized in your observation that discrimination becomes a "fact", not a "complaint." It ignores social context; it fails to be critical, to advocate real, broad-based change. Instead it advocates a focus on yourself, a demand that YOU change YOUR situation within the existing political and economic frameworks, instead of complaining about them, rejecting them, trying to change them. (Because that, after all, would deny "personal responsibility"... right?)

That kind of "self-empowerment" would have had Blacks meekly cooperating with segregation, not rebelling against it."

- Me, forty minutes ago

This notion is indicative of a prominent trend in the way black statements and views are understood: they are the babbling of infants and sheep whose content is not worthy of any direct attention. Self-evidently nonsensical, at most it calls for "explanation" as to why anyone would be so stupid as to say it.

Unless, of course, the statements happen to reinforce the perspective and ideology of white privilege. In which case they are wisdom handed down from God, and clear proof that one is right. "After all, a black person said it!"

Action is rooted in complaint.

You must complain, you must reject and protest what is, before you can change it to what ought to be.



Yes, with an explicit political context.

They wanted organization and solidarity to attack racist institutions: because they recognized their role in the oppression of Blacks.

This is the exact opposite of your approach. You want Blacks to ignore the role of institutions in their oppression - to blame themselves instead.

That is not self-empowerment, not genuine self-empowerment. It is meek servility to institutions: they are good, so therefore I must be bad.

Genuine self-empowerment says: "I am a human. I am their equal. I am not bad. If they treat me poorly and unfairly, it is they, not me, who are bad, and we must struggle against them."



There are different kinds of "taking responsibility for your situation and fixing it."

The sort of "taking responsibility" of the Civil Rights Movement was to recognize that racist laws would not go away on their own, that blacks had the power to destroy them, and that blacks had to exercise this power to get them to go away.

The sort of "taking responsibility" you advocate involves ignoring racist laws, and instead trying to improve oneself in that framework.

That is not "fixing" the problem. It is, at best, coping with it - and coping with it despite the fact that millions of others suffer from it, and your escape will not help them in the least.



No, they don't.

There have been successful Blacks since 1865... even before, if you count people like Frederick Douglas.

That does not prove the non-existence of systemic racism, or the insignificance of it.



Yes, it is crippling.

It does not involve solving the problem: white privilege, its legacy, and its enduring presence. It involves ignoring the problem.



I am not White.



Um, this is a position that I wholeheartedly reject.

I advocate revolutionary direct action, not liberal reformist acceptance of the current distribution of power. (Though certainly I prefer liberal attempts at reforming the system to the denial that the system needs changing at all.)

I just wanted to say, Soheran, that your eloquence and wisdom are much appreciated.

Here's a tip. If I'm a member of a company I'm a part of everything that company does and has done as long as I remain a part of it. The government existed during slavery, whether you did or your ancestors were here is irrelevant.

That said, reparations are not going to happen. It's not even that popular.

Individual citizens are not members of the government. That's a spurious arguement. We do agree that they'll never happen though.

I just wanted to say, Soheran, that your eloquence and wisdom are much appreciated.

Thanks.

But it is you who always provides the crucial empirical backing in these threads, a task I'm much too lazy for, so the appreciation is much reciprocated.

Thanks.

But it is you who always provides the crucial empirical backing in these threads, a task I'm much too lazy for, so the appreciation is much reciprocated.

Get a room you two.

Individual citizens are not members of the government. That's a spurious arguement.

I agree... the moral arguments for reparations as present-day compensation for slavery seem fairly weak to me.

The better approach is to portray reparations as attempts to repair the damage slavery (and the racism that has continued long after it) has caused... something that can be justified on the social justice basis that people should not be confined to economic deprivation and marginalization for things that were not their fault.

er...

1) gangster culture

Gangsta. Gangster culture is Italian. (Sopranos.)

2) rap

Blame the whites who account for 76% of the rap market.

I have noticed a number of people voicing dissatisfaction with certain elements of the black community recently. These things include, but are not constrained to:
1) Black people have more privileges than whites.
2) Black people are more racist than whites in truth.
3) Blacks whine & complain about imagined handicaps in our society.

So I was thinking that maybe you could post any problems(nothing ignorant) you have with the black community, and we could discuss them. I invite all races and peoples into this discussion.

And please, no flaming or mocking. Lets have a nice, civilized discussion. Also, no racism.

Among other problems, they seem to have a high criminality rate:

Racial differences exist, with blacks disproportionately represented among homicide victims and offenders
In 2004, homicide victimization rates for blacks were 6 times higher than the rates for whites.....

In 2004, offending rates for blacks were 7 times higher than the rates for whites

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/homicide/race.htm

Again, in rape statistics, blacks are hugely overrepresented while whites are underrepresented. 12% of Us population is blacks, but blacks comprimise 42% of rapists...

http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/soo.pdf

****** is a more than simply a word. It is a nasty epiteth with a horrorific history. You shouldn't throw it around casually. Your comfort with doing so is exactly what put you in my cross-hairs to begin with.

Moreover, you directed the epiteth at a venerable civil rights group. Calling the NAACP "niggers."

Now I wanna start a rap ensemble called Niggaz All About Cappin' Peeps. Curse my fascination with alternative explanations for acronyms.

My best friend, who is also my next door neighbour is black. And he is a lot more wealthy then i am. I'm worth 2.4 million dollars, he is worth triple that.
I work with a black guy.

Not all blacks are discriminated against and not all blacks discriminate against whites.

Among other problems, they seem to have a high criminality rate:

Look, we know that poor economic conditions tend to lead to crime: during times of economic prosperity, for instance, crime rates tend to go down.

We also know that the portions of the black community that commit the most crimes are also the ones mired in the worst urban poverty in the country: the ones with high unemployment, high infant mortality, high rates of disease, high rates of drug use, awful public services (including education and police protection).

We also know that opportunities for upward mobility for people growing up in those areas are few and far between.

Is it really any mystery as to why this happens? Seriously?

Insofar as it is cultural, it is a cultural development conditioned by given economic and social conditions. To blame it on the culture is to mistake effect for cause.

Black community? Um, well, we have a Somali community. We have a Ghanian community. We have a thriving West Indian community. But I would hardly be so foolish as to lump them together in order to make sweeping statements about 'what bothers me about them'.

Get a room you two.

Better yet, why don't you hire someone to play a dirge for the pathetic racism you so desperately want to validate, along with your other 'poor oppressed white' brothers.

I think that probably my biggest concern lies in a perception that this country has done a whole heckuva lot in the past forty years to try to ameliorate the effects of centuries of institutional racism, and the black community has turned being educated into "being white", and cultivated its own racism of "the white man keepin' the brother man down". I know of several extraordinary young men and women - of many races - from all over the country, who came to our nation's capital to try to improve an impoverished community. Some black kids in the neighborhood throw rocks at them and tell the "crackers" to "go home". It makes it very difficult for me to go back home to those who never bothered to get to know people of other races and say "hey, the effects of slavery are still with us, and we need to improve opportunities and conditions for minorities in this country." I will admit that I am angry. I spent a good deal of my early life fighting against racial stereotypes in a highly insular community. Now that I have chosen to dedicate part of my life to actually serving my fellow human beings whom I defended, I find that sometimes those stupid, ignorant, racist rednecks weren't that far off the mark. Until the black community stops blaming me and other white people for their problems, I don't think there is any hope of racial harmony. We will never be able to meet at a table and objectively address the pressing needs of the black community, but in the mean time, I will still do my part and unfortunately leave fixing the problem to future idealists.

Better yet, why don't you hire someone to play a dirge for the pathetic racism you so desperately want to validate, along with your other 'poor oppressed white' brothers.

Ok, I'll meet you at the Klan meeting later, remember, it's your turn to bring the brownies.

Look, we know that poor economic conditions tend to lead to crime: during times of economic prosperity, for instance, crime rates tend to go down.

We also know that the portions of the black community that commit the most crimes are also the ones mired in the worst urban poverty in the country: the ones with high unemployment, high infant mortality, high rates of disease, high rates of drug use, awful public services (including education and police protection).

We also know that opportunities for upward mobility for people growing up in those areas are few and far between.

Is it really any mystery as to why this happens? Seriously?

Insofar as it is cultural, it is a cultural development conditioned by given economic and social conditions. To blame it on the culture is to mistake effect for cause.


Then black people shouldnt be poor, should they? Why do they have to be so much poorer? Is it because of discrimination? Is it only that? Then how come Asian families, who are also discriminated against, have higher median income rates than whites?

And poverty is not an excuse for crime, tho, they are correlated.

Also, while culture may be effected by economic and social conditions, it also CAUSES those conditions as well, kind of a circle there. Here's some interesting news:


Blair blames spate of murders on black culture


· Political correctness not helping, says PM
· Community leaders react angrily to comments

Comment: Claudia Webbe

Patrick Wintour and Vikram Dodd
Thursday April 12, 2007
The Guardian

Tony Blair yesterday claimed the spate of knife and gun murders in London was not being caused by poverty, but a distinctive black culture. His remarks angered community leaders, who accused him of ignorance and failing to provide support for black-led efforts to tackle the problem.

One accused him of misunderstanding the advice he had been given on the issue at a Downing Street summit.

Black community leaders reacted after Mr Blair said the recent violence should not be treated as part of a general crime wave, but as specific to black youth. He said people had to drop their political correctness and recognise that the violence would not be stopped "by pretending it is not young black kids doing it".

It needed to be addressed by a tailored counter-attack in the same way as football hooliganism was reined in by producing measures aimed at the specific problem, rather than general lawlessness.

Mr Blair's remarks are at odds with those of the Home Office minister Lady Scotland, who told the home affairs select committee last month that the disproportionate number of black youths in the criminal justice system was a function of their disproportionate poverty, and not to do with a distinctive black culture.

Giving the Callaghan lecture in Cardiff, the prime minister admitted he had been "lurching into total frankness" in the final weeks of his premiership. He called on black people to lead the fight against knife crime. He said that "the black community - the vast majority of whom in these communities are decent, law abiding people horrified at what is happening - need to be mobilised in denunciation of this gang culture that is killing innocent young black kids".

Mr Blair said he had been moved to make his controversial remarks after speaking to a black pastor of a London church at a Downing Street knife crime summit, who said: "When are we going to start saying this is a problem amongst a section of the black community and not, for reasons of political correctness, pretend that this is nothing to do with it?" Mr Blair said there needed to be an "intense police focus" on the minority of young black Britons behind the gun and knife attacks. The laws on knife and gun gangs needed to be toughened and the ringleaders "taken out of circulation".

Last night, British African-Caribbean figures leading the fight against gang culture condemned Mr Blair's speech. The Rev Nims Obunge, chief executive of the Peace Alliance, one of the main organisations working against gang crime, denounced the prime minister.

Mr Obunge, who attended the Downing Street summit chaired by Mr Blair in February, said he had been cited by the prime minister: "He makes it look like I said it's the black community doing it. What I said is it's making the black community more vulnerable and they need more support and funding for the work they're doing. ... He has taken what I said out of context. We came for support and he has failed and has come back with more police powers to use against our black children."

Keith Jarrett, chair of the National Black Police Association, whose members work with vulnerable youngsters, said: "Social deprivation and delinquency go hand in hand and we need to tackle both. It is curious that the prime minister does not mention deprivation in his speech."

Lee Jasper, adviser on policing to London's mayor, said: "For years we have said this is an issue the black community has to deal with. The PM is spectacularly ill-informed if he thinks otherwise.

"Every home secretary from [David] Blunkett onwards has been pressed on tackling the growing phenomenon of gun and gang crime in deprived black communities, and government has failed to respond to what has been a clear demand for additional resources to tackle youth alienation and disaffection".

The Home Office has already announced it is looking at the possibility of banning membership of gangs, tougher enforcement of the supposed mandatory five-year sentences for possession of illegal firearms, and lowering the age from 21 to 18 for this mandatory sentence.

Answering questions later Mr Blair said: "Economic inequality is a factor and we should deal with that, but I don't think it's the thing that is producing the most violent expression of this social alienation.

"I think that is to do with the fact that particular youngsters are being brought up in a setting that has no rules, no discipline, no proper framework around them."

Some people working with children knew at the age of five whether they were going to be in "real trouble" later, he said.

Mr Blair is known to believe the tendency for many black boys to be raised in families without a father leads to a lack of appropriate role models.

He said: "We need to stop thinking of this as a society that has gone wrong - it has not - but of specific groups that for specific reasons have gone outside of the proper lines of respect and good conduct towards others and need by specific measures to be brought back into the fold."

The Commission for Racial Equality broadly backed Mr Blair, saying people "shouldn't be afraid to talk about this issue for fear of sounding prejudiced".

Mr Blair spoke out as a second teenager was due to appear in court charged with the murder of 14-year-old Paul Erhahon, stabbed to death in east London on Friday. He was the seventh Londoner under 16 to be murdered since the end of January, and his 15-year-old friend, who was also stabbed, remains in hospital.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,2055148,00.html

Ok, I'll meet you at the Klan meeting later, remember, it's your turn to bring the brownies.

So you finally admit to your roots.

Also, while culture may be effected by economic and social conditions, it also CAUSES those conditions as well, kind of a circle there. Here's some interesting news:


http://www.guardian.co.uk/frontpage/story/0,,2055148,00.html
Blair is a racist? That's not news...unless you've been living under a rock...

Blair is a racist? That's not news...unless you've been living under a rock...

Compared to you, he's Ghandi...

I think that probably my biggest concern lies in a perception that this country has done a whole heckuva lot in the past forty years to try to ameliorate the effects of centuries of institutional racism,

We have? Really?

Actually, much of the black community wasn't happy with the achievements of the Civil Rights Era, especially urban Northerners... they were positive changes, yes, but they didn't go far enough.

Martin Luther King (among others) spoke of the need for radical economic reform if institutional racism was ever to be truly tackled: radical economic reform, indeed, amounting to socialism, as King himself acknowledged.

Indeed, it was widely recognized among the black movements of the time that to really tackle racism, a whole lot more than merely ending segregation and other forms of de jure racism was necessary. That's why black radical movements gained such stature at the time, and might have gained more if they hadn't been targets of a state campaign of harassment, infiltration, intimidation, sabotage, and at times outright murder.

Did any of these changes ever happen? No. The closest we've come is affirmative action, whose effect is not that great, and even that now has an expiration date on it.

Compared to you, he's Ghandi...

Uh....huh. This from the Junior StormFront wannabe. Yet you admit you know he is a racist.

Uh....huh. This from the Junior StormFront wannabe. Yet you admit you know he is a racist.

And you admit that you are 1000 times more racist than he is...;)

Then black people shouldnt be poor, should they?

Indeed. The present economic system, dominated as it is by rich whites, must be overthrown and replaced, so that there are no more poor blacks: indeed, no more poor anyones.

But I digress. ;)

Why do they have to be so much poorer? Is it because of discrimination?

Past and present, yes.

Is it only that?

Primarily.

Then how come Asian families, who are also discriminated against, have higher median income rates than whites?

Because discrimination is not a constant.

People are discriminated against in different ways, and to different degrees.

And poverty is not an excuse for crime, tho, they are correlated.

Who said anything about an "excuse"? I said it was a cause.

Also, while culture may be effected by economic and social conditions, it also CAUSES those conditions as well, kind of a circle there.

Yes, it's part of the self-reinforcing cycle of poverty.

But this would not happen if the cycle were broken: if we achieved genuine racial equality and economic justice in this country, such that real effort was made to improve the conditions of and offer meaningful opportunities to poor blacks (and whites).

And not just a few. All of them, as a class.

Here's some interesting news:

Strange that blacks in both the US and the UK would develop the same cultural features in this respect, hmm? Maybe it's genetic?

Or maybe... just maybe... the "culture" argument is just an excuse for people who want to deny the real effects of racism, both here and across the ocean?

And you admit that you are 1000 times more racist than he is...;)

That might even make me more racist than you! And yet I am not the one attempting to justify a hatred of blacks.

i dunno how it is in the states or anywhere else... in australia most people will complain about the handouts aboriginals get....in there own homes of course....they seem to forget that before england came over....which wasnt that long ago...all they did was hunt and gather....england brought a little friend called alcohol...which the aboriginals couldnt understand....and as well as many other ways the english destroyed the culture, genocide, rape etc...putting them in such a big hole.....they keep together in there communities...and back through the generations...everyone was a pisshead unable to help themselves with noone to tell them any different and its going to take a long time to get rid of the behaviour that was instilled upon them..education is a big way out....just time.... i am both native australian and a convict......and so ya know...the default flag on nation states is the aboriginal flag. cheers

That might even make me more racist than you! And yet I am not the one attempting to justify a hatred of blacks.

While using every racist slang in the book!

So you finally admit to your roots.

That was sarcasm. You know, if you want to call me a racist to hide your own racist thought, then go ahead, your opinion of me mean this much >.< to me, so if you want to think that anyone who doesn't kowtow to the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton as racist, then by all means go ahead, whatever helps you sleep at night.

Indeed. The present economic system, dominated as it is by rich whites, must be overthrown and replaced, so that there are no more poor blacks: indeed, no more poor anyones.

But I digress. ;)


Then why are majority black countries whose economic system is dominated by blacks are also poor? Colonisation?


Past and present, yes.



Primarily.


Proof?



Because discrimination is not a constant.

People are discriminated against in different ways, and to different degrees.


Then you are arguing that there is no direct correlation between discrimination and success. Whites should be the ones who are least discriminated against so they should be the richest in median income but they arent.





Who said anything about an "excuse"? I said it was a cause.



Yes, it's part of the self-reinforcing cycle of poverty.

But this would not happen if the cycle were broken: if we achieved genuine racial equality and economic justice in this country, such that real effort was made to improve the conditions of and offer meaningful opportunities to poor blacks (and whites).

And not just a few. All of them, as a class.


Racial equality? So you support White entertainment channel, scholarships only for whites, etc....



Strange that blacks in both the US and the UK would develop the same cultural features in this respect, hmm? Maybe it's genetic?

Or maybe... just maybe... the "culture" argument is just an excuse for people who want to deny the real effects of racism, both here and across the ocean?

Or maybe it's because of the fact that US and UK cultures are very similar? And there are also studies which claim agressiveness has a genetic component. This may or may not have a racial aspect. Here's a study about Maori:


Maori 'warrior' gene linked to aggression [audio clip]
Page 1 of 2 12:00AM Wednesday August 09, 2006

A New Zealand researcher claims there is an over-representation of the "warrior" gene, which has been linked to aggressive behaviour, in Maori men.

Dr Rod Lea said the monoamine oxidase gene, carried by a large number of Maori, could be key to addressing health issues.

The genetic epidemiologist at the Institute of Environmental Science and Research in Wellington said the gene has been linked to aggressive behaviour as well as addictions to things such as tobacco.

Maori leaders said there were many other factors which dictated whether people turned violent, such as poverty.

The gene was discovered by American researchers but had not previously been linked to an ethnic group.

Dr Lea, who has been speaking at an international conference in Brisbane, denies Australian reports that quoted him suggesting the gene has links to criminality.

Australian Associated Press quoted him as saying: "It is controversial because it has implications suggesting links with criminality among Maori people. I think there is a link, it definitely predisposes people to be more likely to be criminals and engage in that type of behaviour as they grow older.

"There are lots of lifestyle, upbringing-related exposures that could be relevant here so, obviously, the gene won't automatically make you a criminal."

He said Maori were also more prone to obesity than white New Zealanders, and while the researchers don't yet know the role of lifestyle factors, they believe ancestral genetics played a vital role.
......

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=204&objectid=10395334

The problem I see is that
A) you are born into the company
B) you can be forced to pay to this company before you are legally allowed to choose on your own to leave it

However, you still may leave when you are old enough to and legally your proxy (which is who represents you legally until you're of age) may also do so. You've always got that right as much as any other right that your proxy holds for you until you reach majority.

That might even make me more racist than you! And yet I am not the one attempting to justify a hatred of blacks.

I dont hate blacks. But you may, given your racist jokes...;)

Individual citizens are not members of the government. That's a spurious arguement. We do agree that they'll never happen though.

They are. As much as individual stockholders are members of a company. You have interest in that company/government. You invest in it and gain from it. You choose to be a part of what it is and what it represents. And yes, as long as you own that stock and as long as the company exists you may very well have to pay for the faults of that company.

Jocabia and Cat Tribe
Now that I'm more calmed down. ****** is a word, just simply a word. When I said I know a guy who calls the NAACP Niggers Are Against Colored Peoples I was not condoneing the use of the word, merely stating what someone else said. You might have taken it to mean that was my opinion, but if it was I would have supported it with further statements. I do not condone racism, I do not condone the use of the race card, I do not appreciate other people bringing it up, and I most certainly do not appreciate it when people accuse me of any of the three. I keep my accusations to myself; I'd appreciate it if people would keep any accusations toward me to themselves. If I percieve I am being attacked, I respond in kind; I percieved your jabs as attacks, as it seems you percieved my posts as attacks. I merely stated an opinion as asked in my first post, thats what I beleive the problems are. Honestly, you two only served to set the whole race card opinion even harder and anger me in the process.

Appologies for anything I said you found offensive. I'd like those sentiments returned. We do not know each other, I'm sure you are both nice calm and freindly people in your own right and we all have merely gotten off on the wrong foot. Err... maybe it would be... no can't think of anything cleverly stupid to finsih with.

TCT adequately addressed this as far as I'm concerned. I'm sorry, but I occasionally have to eat and this was why I was not around. I was also getting a manicure which makes it difficult to type.

Then why are majority black countries whose economic system is dominated by blacks are also poor? Colonisation?

For the same reason other developing countries are poor. Colonization definitely being one.

Proof?

When a racial group endures severe, consistent racism for centuries that continues into the present day, and that racial group also lags behind the average on a wide variety of economic indicators, it's not too difficult to draw the obvious conclusion.

Then you are arguing that there is no direct correlation between discrimination and success. Whites should be the ones who are least discriminated against so they should be the richest in median income but they arent.

While it is true that whites are not the richest in median income, they still dominate the overwhelming majority of the top political and economic positions.

Asians benefit from the fact that most recent Asian immigrants are well-educated professionals.

Racial equality? So you support White entertainment channel, scholarships only for whites, etc....

No more than I think that fire trucks should shoot water at every house equally, irrespective of whether or not the house is on fire.

In a society dominated by racial inequality, genuine racial equality requires that special effort be directed towards raising the disadvantaged. Otherwise, the "racial equality" is purely nominal.

Or maybe it's because of the fact that US and UK cultures are very similar?

But why does this similarity also apply to race?

If you people think that Racism doens't exist then you sure as hell don't live up where I do currently. I see and hear more racism than I care to witness, and mostly by elderly white people who don't like people of minorities (african americans, native americans, mexican americans, etc) going to the University in the area. Calling them almost every racist word known to man.


If someone thinks that Racism doesn't exist, then they are blind to the truth of what does and does not exist.

We have? Really?

Actually, much of the black community wasn't happy with the achievements of the Civil Rights Era, especially urban Northerners... they were positive changes, yes, but they didn't go far enough.

Martin Luther King (among others) spoke of the need for radical economic reform if institutional racism was ever to be truly tackled: radical economic reform, indeed, amounting to socialism, as King himself acknowledged.

Indeed, it was widely recognized among the black movements of the time that to really tackle racism, a whole lot more than merely ending segregation and other forms of de jure racism was necessary. That's why black radical movements gained such stature at the time, and might have gained more if they hadn't been targets of a state campaign of harassment, infiltration, intimidation, sabotage, and at times outright murder.

Did any of these changes ever happen? No. The closest we've come is affirmative action, whose effect is not that great, and even that now has an expiration date on it.

I'm not sure that you understand the term "try to ameliorate". If everything that the civil rights agitators (in the absolute best sense of the word) had envisioned, then we would presumably not have any problems of latent ingrained racially differentiating institutions. And I specifically refered to a perception. That perception is that not only have the efforts undertaken to address the legacy of slavery and jim crow not helped as those civil rights leaders had suggested, but that the efforts of society as a whole, while not everything MLK Jr had hoped, have been met within significant portions of black communities with racism and disdain - surely sapping us idealists of power and argument to work towards those changes. The fact that you chose to completely ignore the bulk of my previous thesis - being about the response of the black community - seems to indicate that you implicitly acknowledge my point.

I have noticed a number of people voicing dissatisfaction with certain elements of the black community recently. These things include, but are not constrained to:
1) Black people have more privileges than whites.
2) Black people are more racist than whites in truth.
3) Blacks whine & complain about imagined handicaps in our society.

So I was thinking that maybe you could post any problems(nothing ignorant) you have with the black community, and we could discuss them. I invite all races and peoples into this discussion.

And please, no flaming or mocking. Lets have a nice, civilized discussion. Also, no racism.
Thank you for making this thread because I was wondering if anyone was going to acknowledge and celebrate the annual Springtime Blooming of the NSG Racists. Every year, first come the Crocus, then the Daffodils, and then the Oppressed Whites. :rolleyes:

Anyway...

The only problem I have with the "black community" is what I view as their complacency. The Civil Rights movement notwithstanding, racism is rife in the US, along with many other kinds of bigotry. I remember, back in the 80s, despite the nuclear-fear nihilism, there was a kind of optimism about civil rights. We progressives felt we had accomplished so much -- in race, in gender, in religion, etc. We were really looking forward to concentrating all our activism on gay rights.

But now look at us. Even though institutionalized racism has been broken, it rears its ugly head in private society where it is much harder to root out. The media and pop culture are filled with racial stereotypes that only increase hostility and suspicion. People make light of the darkest episodes in our history, they complain about being forced to remember that history at all, they even complain about not being allowed to freely use the most hostile language of our racist past, as if they should have some kind of god-given right to talk to others as if they are shit. And yet the "black community," as a whole, seems somehow blind to this. They tolerate -- with a kind of fatalism, it seems at times -- their own members, celebrities, and children espousing the most negative stereotypes of themselves that white racism ever created. I cannot understand it, not at all.

But it's not much better for women or religious minorities. Women fear being called bullshit names like "feminazi" and take little or no action as they continue to be paid less than men for equal work, continue to be blamed by society for sexual assaults against them, continue to receive lower standards of health care than men -- and increasingly have their civil and human rights judged and curtailed by others. Every day I see the advances of the women's rights movement being lost to sexist backsliding, yet where are the activists? They are writing articles about how women can keep their men from leaving them.

As for religious minorities, I do not see why anyone should think it politically incorrect to come out swinging when anyone even remotely connected to the US government suggests -- as a few politcians and extremist fundamentalist campaign donors have -- that there should be a religious litmus test for public office or that members of minority religions should not be allowed to hold jobs such as public school teacher and so on.

I just do not understand why Americans are so complacent and compliant these days. I grew up in a country where people stood up for themselves and their rights. If I have a problem with the "black community," it is that I don't understand why they are allowing their enemies (racist bigots) to regain ground in US society.

Thank you for making this thread because I was wondering if anyone was going to acknowledge and celebrate the annual Springtime Blooming of the NSG Racists. Every year, first come the Crocus, then the Daffodils, and then the Oppressed Whites. :rolleyes:

Anyway...

The only problem I have with the "black community" is what I view as their complacency. The Civil Rights movement notwithstanding, racism is rife in the US, along with many other kinds of bigotry. I remember, back in the 80s, despite the nuclear-fear nihilism, there was a kind of optimism about civil rights. We progressives felt we had accomplished so much -- in race, in gender, in religion, etc. We were really looking forward to concentrating all our activism on gay rights.

But now look at us. Even though institutionalized racism has been broken, it rears its ugly head in private society where it is much harder to root out. The media and pop culture are filled with racial stereotypes that only increase hostility and suspicion. People make light of the darkest episodes in our history, they complain about being forced to remember that history at all, they even complain about not being allowed to freely use the most hostile language of our racist past, as if they should have some kind of god-given right to talk to others as if they are shit. And yet the "black community," as a whole, seems somehow blind to this. They tolerate -- with a kind of fatalism, it seems at times -- their own members, celebrities, and children espousing the most negative stereotypes of themselves that white racism ever created. I cannot understand it, not at all.

But it's not much better for women or religious minorities. Women fear being called bullshit names like "feminazi" and take little or no action as they continue to be paid less than men for equal work, continue to be blamed by society for sexual assaults against them, continue to receive lower standards of health care than men -- and increasingly have their civil and human rights judged and curtailed by others. Every day I see the advances of the women's rights movement being lost to sexist backsliding, yet where are the activists? They are writing articles about how women can keep their men from leaving them.

As for religious minorities, I do not see why anyone should think it politically incorrect to come out swinging when anyone even remotely connected to the US government suggests -- as a few politcians and extremist fundamentalist campaign donors have -- that there should be a religious litmus test for public office or that members of minority religions should not be allowed to hold jobs such as public school teacher and so on.

I just do not understand why Americans are so complacent and compliant these days. I grew up in a country where people stood up for themselves and their rights. If I have a problem with the "black community," it is that I don't understand why they are allowing their enemies (racist bigots) to regain ground in US society.

It's actually amusing because it really does happen every year and nearly to a man they all pretend to be much older and not just bored kids that are out of school.

I forgot what time of year it was at first until I saw this stuff starting to grow.

It's actually amusing because it really does happen every year and nearly to a man they all pretend to be much older and not just bored kids that are out of school.

I forgot what time of year it was at first until I saw this stuff starting to grow.
I'm thinking of naming a species of tulip after them -- the Oppressed White. That way we can have a proper festival every time they pop up.

But seriously, it really is an argument in favor of summer sports programs.

I'm not sure that you understand the term "try to ameliorate".

Actually, my focus was more on the term "heckuva lot."

And I specifically refered to a perception.

I took the context of the rest of your post to indicate that this was a perception you shared. The country has done so much, yet the black community is ungrateful.

If I misinterpreted you, my apologies.

That perception is that not only have the efforts undertaken to address the legacy of slavery and jim crow not helped as those civil rights leaders had suggested,

Mostly, they actually have helped... just not enough.

but that the efforts of society as a whole, while not everything MLK Jr had hoped, have been met within significant portions of black communities with racism and disdain

Not really.

It was the black community that advocated them, that struggled for them, that has defended them as they have been rolled back.

If at the moment they are skeptical of white attempts to "end racism", it is because they have good reason to be. THAT was my point.

Actually, my focus was more on the term "heckuva lot."

I took the context of the rest of your post to indicate that this was a perception you shared. The country has done so much, yet the black community is ungrateful.

If I misinterpreted you, my apologies.

Mostly, they actually have helped... just not enough.

Not really.

It was the black community that advocated them, that struggled for them, that has defended them as they have been rolled back.

If at the moment they are skeptical of white attempts to "end racism", it is because they have good reason to be. THAT was my point.

Ok. Can you at least see my concern that especially visible aspects of the black community have made it very difficult for the progressive elements within the white community to advocate for more comprehensive changes? You wrote that there are significant problems of adequate law-enforcement and educational opportunities in minority neighborhoods, but whenever I hear about no snitching campaigns and smart black kids being said to be "acting white", it makes me wonder if racism is really something that I should be fighting against. Should I be spending my time on other social justice causes that can levee greater gains? Should I fight for economic justice and just let racism get worked out on its own somehow? When I see ten year old black kids throwing rocks at volunteers cleaning a park in their neighborhood yelling for the white people to go home, how does that give me any reason to think that the problems in the black community can be solved anywhere but within the black community itself? There just seems to be too much of a penchant for blaming white folks, and not enough effort at addressing the attitudes that perpetuate poverty and the cycle of violence and drug abuse. Why?

Ok. Can you at least see my concern that especially visible aspects of the black community have made it very difficult for the progressive elements within the white community to advocate for more comprehensive changes? You wrote that there are significant problems of adequate law-enforcement and educational opportunities in minority neighborhoods, but whenever I hear about no snitching campaigns and smart black kids being said to be "acting white", it makes me wonder if racism is really something that I should be fighting against. Should I be spending my time on other social justice causes that can levee greater gains? Should I fight for economic justice and just let racism get worked out on its own somehow? When I see ten year old black kids throwing rocks at volunteers cleaning a park in their neighborhood yelling for the white people to go home, how does that give me any reason to think that the problems in the black community can be solved anywhere but within the black community itself? There just seems to be too much of a penchant for blaming white folks, and not enough effort at addressing the attitudes that perpetuate poverty and the cycle of violence and drug abuse. Why?

That's the problem. No one is blaming white folks. It's a systemic problem. That's the point. Many of the people responsible are no longer alive. We are ALL responsible for fixing it.

While using every racist slang in the book!

To make fun of the way you pussy foot around your racism.

We'd all prefer you just come out and use those racist slangs, so we could just ignore you, rather than pretend there is any rational reason for your bigotry.

Anyway, it's not our fault that all you white boys get jungle fever and want to have mud babies with us coloured folk.

I actually get mildly annoyed when I hear a black man complaining about how he's discriminated against when gender is a bigger factor for discrimination than race is. I mean, if they made commercials where white women bitched about being discriminated against based on gender, this would not be acceptable and they'd be targeted for ridicule, but it's fine for black men to bitch about it.

Not that any sort of discrimination is acceptable, but it seems like some people like to corner the market on playing a victim.

Oh, and I also don't like when people go on about how they're proud to be black... it's just as bad as people who are proud to be white or belong to a particular nationality. It's not like you have any sort of control over your race or anything, so why be proud of it?

(and I'm well aware that not every black person does this or that... some people do though)

That's the problem. No one is blaming white folks. It's a systemic problem. That's the point. Many of the people responsible are no longer alive. We are ALL responsible for fixing it.

I'll just mention that I find it highly spurious to say that no one is blaming white folks. That may be where a great deal of disjunction occurs in our thoughts, and I will freely admit that it may be unduly influenced by media.

When you say that we are all responsible for fixing it, you don't specify what "it" is. The "it" to me has to start with attitudes towards drugs, violence, crime, gender, sexuality, and race. If those attitudes don't change, most talk about institutional racism seems to be intellectual masturbation, except it doesn't feel good. Until then, there is no functional race problem beyond the scattered holdouts down south and out west, and I'll still fight those guys every chance I get. But poverty can be overcome with conviction. Education can be attained with effort; Criminals can be marginalized with community; Drug dealers can be shut down with courage. In short, I hope this is completely wrong, but should we stop trying until a new generation comes around that has attitudes to capitalize on an investment in black communities?

To make fun of the way you pussy foot around your racism.

We'd all prefer you just come out and use those racist slangs, so we could just ignore you, rather than pretend there is any rational reason for your bigotry.

Anyway, it's not our fault that all you white boys get jungle fever and want to have mud babies with us coloured folk.

*notice Neesika as the only one calling me a racist, shrugs and goes back to his business*

*notice Neesika as the only one calling me a racist, shrugs and goes back to his business*

Ha...you've shown yourself not only unable to understand sarcasm...but you've also failed to read the subtext.

I actually get mildly annoyed when I hear a black man complaining about how he's discriminated against when gender is a bigger factor for discrimination than race is. I mean, if they made commercials where white women bitched about being discriminated against based on gender, this would not be acceptable and they'd be targeted for ridicule, but it's fine for black men to bitch about it.
Okay, say gender is a bigger factor for discrimination than race...but race is still a factor, yes? So then who would encounter the most discrimination? Minority women.

Do you think that white women are more discriminated against than black men?

Ha...you've shown yourself not only unable to understand sarcasm...but you've also failed to read the subtext.

I just heard a high shrilling voice, a voice that is annoying, hmm, must be the wind. *goes back to his business*

Okay, say gender is a bigger factor for discrimination than race...but race is still a factor, yes? So then who would encounter the most discrimination? Minority women.
Yeah, but I've never seen a commercial with a black woman bitching about how she's doubly discriminated against. I did read a study a while back where they took the opinions of black men and women and white men and women and asked which form of discrimination was most prevalent, racism or sexism. The white men generally thought neither was more prevalent, white women thought it was sexism, black men thought it was racism and black women generally thought it was sexism.

Do you think that white women are more discriminated against than black men?
Yes.

Yeah, but I've never seen a commercial with a black woman bitching about how she's doubly discriminated against. I did read a study a while back where they took the opinions of black men and women and white men and women and asked which form of discrimination was most prevalent, racism or sexism. The white men generally thought neither was more prevalent, white women thought it was sexism, black men thought it was racism and black women generally thought it was sexism.


Yes.
"Each man will report of the fair as his own market went in it." -- Lawrence Sterne

In other words, each person thinks the whole world is as good or bad as his or her own experience feels. You think sexism is a worse problem than racism. Is that true, statistically, or is it your sense of the matter because you are a woman and a target of sexism? I'm a woman, too, and get really angry about sexism. Sexism is certainly a bigger problem for me than racism, since I'm a white woman.

But I do not prioritize one form of bigotry/discrimination over another. They are all equally unacceptable, so I choose not to argue over which form of it is worse than another. I don't care if blacks are less discriminated against than women. The fact that they are discriminated against at all is enough for me.

Okay, say gender is a bigger factor for discrimination than race...but race is still a factor, yes? So then who would encounter the most discrimination? Minority women.

Do you think that white women are more discriminated against than black men?

You know, I never really thought about it. Just taking a look at corporate boardrooms, legislatures, and other high visibility positions of power, I would say completely unscientifically that black men are represented more proportionally than white women, who are more so than black women. Doesn't necessarily mean that sexism is more harmful than racism, though. There are a lot of factors involved, and seeing as I am neither a black man nor a white woman, I think I'll leave it to idealogues. I think I can say that in the workplace, discrimination against women seems much more pervasive and overt than racial discrimination.

"Each man will report of the fair as his own market went in it." -- Lawrence Sterne

In other words, each person thinks the whole world is as good or bad as his or her own experience feels. You think sexism is a worse problem than racism. Is that true, statistically, or is it your sense of the matter because you are a woman and a target of sexism? I'm a woman, too, and get really angry about sexism. Sexism is certainly a bigger problem for me than racism, since I'm a white woman.

But I do not prioritize one form of bigotry/discrimination over another. They are all equally unacceptable, so I choose not to argue over which form of it is worse than another. I don't care if blacks are less discriminated against than women. The fact that they are discriminated against at all is enough for me.
As I mentioned, black women generally felt that sexism was a bigger issue than racism too so it's not just me. If I recall, women are more likely to live below the poverty line than black people as well.

OCC: im not racist i have black friends.

last time i checked, alot of us died in the civil war so that they could even be like us, i say were about square with them, and reperations, bull we payed those off with our dead, seems like no one talks about this on the news.

OCC: im not racist i have black friends.

last time i checked, alot of us died in the civil war so that they could even be like us, i say were about square with them, and reperations, bull we payed those off with our dead, seems like no one talks about this on the news.

Because it doesn't serve race hustlers any purpose to champion dead white guys. Once they remove that perpetual racial chip on their shoulder perhaps they will. That is a simple version mind you. Claiming the Civil War was about slavery only is like saying the Iraq War is only about Oil. There was more to the Civil War than slavery. But I agree with you none the less.

last time i checked, alot of us died in the civil war so that they could even be like us, i say were about square with them, and reperations, bull we payed those off with our dead, seems like no one talks about this on the news.

The Civil War ended slavery. It did not compensate slaves for their enslavement, or repair the damage slavery did.

The Civil War satisfied the obligation of society to not tolerate slavery. It did not satisfy the obligation of society to repair the damages injustices like slavery cause.

****** is a more than simply a word. It is a nasty epiteth with a horrorific history. You shouldn't throw it around casually. Your comfort with doing so is exactly what put you in my cross-hairs to begin with.

Moreover, you directed the epiteth at a venerable civil rights group. Calling the NAACP "niggers."

Nor did you apologize or back down from the epiteth last time. (links below)


Just a thought... TG

As I mentioned, black women generally felt that sexism was a bigger issue than racism too so it's not just me. If I recall, women are more likely to live below the poverty line than black people as well.

I'm not disputing that at all. In fact, I know it well. I'm just saying that, in my opinion and affecting just my personal worldview, the fact that sexism is more prevalent worldwide than racism does not lessen the problems of racism. The fact that I am caught up in the struggle for gender equality does not make me less likely to take up the fight for racial equality as well.

On the other hand, there are people who are so jealous of the victim spotlight that they want to silence all talk of other people's oppression in order to keep all the attention for their own problems. You find such people in every possible area of discrimination, and I have no patience for them.

For the same reason other developing countries are poor. Colonization definitely being one.


But why Sub-Saharan Africa is the POOREST?


When a racial group endures severe, consistent racism for centuries that continues into the present day, and that racial group also lags behind the average on a wide variety of economic indicators, it's not too difficult to draw the obvious conclusion.


The obvious ASSUMPTION is that discrimination is partially a reason. You havent proven that but it's ok. What I wanted you to answer was that if it is the ONLY reason? Or is it the MAIN reason?



While it is true that whites are not the richest in median income, they still dominate the overwhelming majority of the top political and economic positions.


Because they are currently the majority in USA. If you are expecting whites not to dominate, then you are expecting special treatment for MINORITIES.


Asians benefit from the fact that most recent Asian immigrants are well-educated professionals.


And why arent there African well-educated professionals to balance things out?


No more than I think that fire trucks should shoot water at every house equally, irrespective of whether or not the house is on fire.


If by fire, you mean discrimination, there is discrimination against whites as well. But your whole analogy is superficial anyways.


In a society dominated by racial inequality, genuine racial equality requires that special effort be directed towards raising the disadvantaged. Otherwise, the "racial equality" is purely nominal.


There is inequality everywhere. Should we have affirmative action for those who are more prone to cancer genetically because based on that single criteria, their life is going to be much harder?

I'm not telling you to try not addressing inequality. But addressing inequality with more inequality, or as you put it, "special effort", seems silly to me.


But why does this similarity also apply to race?

Why not? Just like all Brits are effected by American culture, Blacks who hold UK citizenship may be effected by Black American culture...

er...

1) gangster culture
2) rap
3) they can call someone and naughty word and I can't :(
4) race card (doesn't work if your white for some reason)

Quoted for truth.:)

*notice Neesika as the only one calling me a racist, shrugs and goes back to his business*

Oh look, page 11 on an NSG race related thread, and somebodies thrown teddy out of the pram and resorted to screaming racist....

The Civil War ended slavery. It did not compensate slaves for their enslavement, or repair the damage slavery did.

The Civil War satisfied the obligation of society to not tolerate slavery. It did not satisfy the obligation of society to repair the damages injustices like slavery cause.

So if all whites are responsible for the things SOME whites did BACK THEN, are all blacks also responsible for the things SOME blacks do, such as much higher crime rates?

The Civil War ended slavery. It did not compensate slaves for their enslavement, or repair the damage slavery did.

The Civil War satisfied the obligation of society to not tolerate slavery. It did not satisfy the obligation of society to repair the damages injustices like slavery cause.

Namely? Could the poster be any more specific?

Incidentally, why should "society" apologise for its being stronger than another? Slavery was simply the product of the technological superiority of Europe over Africa, hence, why apologise for our superiority? That is tantamount to embracing weakness.

So if all whites are responsible for the things SOME whites did BACK THEN

Don't make up things I didn't say. It's annoying.

This thread is still going? How long do these things last?

Is there even anyone alive today who are directly responsible for the slave trade?

So if all whites are responsible for the things SOME whites did BACK THEN, are all blacks also responsible for the things SOME blacks do, such as much higher crime rates?

No one is talking about whites but you. He said society, most specifically referencing the government. Are you actually claiming that holding the government responsible is equal to saying white are responsible?

Don't make up things I didn't say. It's annoying.

I thought you were implying that an apology is required for slavery...

Namely? Could the poster be any more specific?

Incidentally, why should "society" apologise for its being stronger than another? Slavery was simply the product of the technological superiority of Europe over Africa, hence, why apologise for our superiority? That is tantamount to embracing weakness.

I agree. I think it's the same with people. I should be able to kick ass as much as I like with no consequences. If you're crippled or infirm, why should I apologize that I'm taking advantage of that. That's tantamount to embracing weakness.

Has anyone taken into account that holding the government responsible for past abuses means...wait for it...that the government which happens to represent blacks (and others) and NOT just whites shall be the one taking said responsibility? It could never be 'all about the whites' since frankly, the government doesn't just represent the whites.

In the extremely unlikely event that reperations were ever made...it wouldn't just be white folk paying via their tax dollars.

No one is talking about whites but you. He said society, most specifically referencing the government. Are you actually claiming that holding the government responsible is equal to saying white are responsible?

Well, if the government was being run by Martians instead of whites, if this issue was unrelated with overall white guilt stuff, then no.

Namely? Could the poster be any more specific?

Incidentally, why should "society" apologise for its being stronger than another? Slavery was simply the product of the technological superiority of Europe over Africa, hence, why apologise for our superiority? That is tantamount to embracing weakness.

It isn't tantamount to embracing weakness. The fact is you have advanced socially as well, so you see slavery as being wrong.

Remember, there was a time when slavery in no form was seen as being wrong. When women were seen as little more than cattle, when there weren't even child labor laws.

As society progresses, we incorporate new ideas and beliefs. One such belief is that all people are born free. This contradicts slavery. So we got rid of it.

Its not a sign of weakness, but rather a sign of how far we have progressed as human beings.

Has anyone taken into account that holding the government responsible for past abuses means...wait for it...that the government which happens to represent blacks (and others) and NOT just whites shall be the one taking said responsibility? It could never be 'all about the whites' since frankly, the government doesn't just represent the whites.

In the extremely unlikely event that reperations were ever made...it wouldn't just be white folk paying via their tax dollars.

Next, you will claim that Nazi Germany represented jews as well, since there were jews living there.

Quoted for truth.:)

I love this. It doesn't matter what racist thing people say, or why they say it, or if they've supported, y'all can't wait to cheerlead it. But hey, you're focused on reason right, not the promotion of the inferiority of black people? That's why you ignore all the reasoned posts and cheerlead the one that doesn't really say anything. I love when you expose your purposes right up front. Kind of like bitching that someone noticed racism and called someone on it. That's really frustrating isn't it. Kind of like calling water wet. I know every time someone says "this water is wet" I start hollering about how unfair it is.

But why Sub-Saharan Africa is the POOREST?

Geography, probably, combined with historical variables.

The obvious ASSUMPTION is that discrimination is partially a reason. You havent proven that but it's ok. What I wanted you to answer was that if it is the ONLY reason? Or is it the MAIN reason?

Because the other reasons make little sense, or don't correlate with the evidence.

Like the notion that "culture" is somehow an arbitrary feature occurring in a vacuum that somehow randomly pops up when minority populations suffer from systemic racism and long-term economic deprivation.

Because they are currently the majority in USA. If you are expecting whites not to dominate, then you are expecting special treatment for MINORITIES.

There are hair colors and eye colors that are more prominent than others. People with those hair colors and eye colors do not dominate over those without them.

And why arent there African well-educated professionals to balance things out?

Because the kidnapped Africans brought here by force didn't have to meet the standards Asian immigrants have to today, and because racism and economic deprivation has denied equal educational opportunities to blacks.

If by fire, you mean discrimination, there is discrimination against whites as well.

Not to anywhere near the same degree.

There is inequality everywhere. Should we have affirmative action for those who are more prone to cancer genetically because based on that single criteria, their life is going to be much harder?

Should we use more health care resources on them? All else being equal, yes.

But since the inequality they suffer from is not in the area of education or employment opportunities, affirmative action is not the correct remedy to that inequality.

I'm not telling you to try not addressing inequality. But addressing inequality with more inequality, or as you put it, "special effort", seems silly to me.

I think wasting water on all those houses that aren't on fire is silly. But that's just me.

Why not? Just like all Brits are effected by American culture, Blacks who hold UK citizenship may be effected by Black American culture...

Why aren't they affected by American culture as such?

Why Black American culture specifically?

Perhaps because their experiences of systemic racism are similar?

Next, you will claim that Nazi Germany represented jews as well, since there were jews living there.

Are you comparing the current government's treatment of blacks to the Nazi government's treatment of Jews. Seriously.

Our government includes blacks, blacks have the vote, and they are full citizens. Yes, they are a part of our government. I'm sorry that this is unclear to you.

Next, you will claim that Nazi Germany represented jews as well, since there were jews living there.

No, he probably won't, since Nazi Germany had an open policy about exterminating jews and the like.

The U.S. government doesnt have such a policy for African Americans here.

I thought you were implying that an apology is required for slavery...

It is, from those political institutions that kept it legal.

And reparations are required to repair the damage that slavery and succeeding racism has done.

Not because anyone is "responsible" in the positive sense... but because injustices always demand correction.

Well, if the government was being run by Martians instead of whites, if this issue was unrelated with overall white guilt stuff, then no.

So the government is being run by whites? But blacks aren't disadvantaged. I find this amusing. You've claimed that whites have ALL the power in this statement (the government is being run by whites) while simultaneously arguing that whites are experiencing discrimination and thus we should apply the "water" to address the "fire" equally to all populations. I love when racists destroy their own arguments. Thank you for admitting the widespread discrimination that still exists.

Well, if the government was being run by Martians instead of whites, if this issue was unrelated with overall white guilt stuff, then no.

What is up with all this 'White Guilt' stuff?

I doubt many blacks would want white people to feel guilty about slavery. At least I don't. I just want you to aknowledge that by today's standards it was a pretty rotten thing.

Are you comparing the current government's treatment of blacks to the Nazi government's treatment of Jews. Seriously.

Our government includes blacks, blacks have the vote, and they are full citizens. Yes, they are a part of our government. I'm sorry that this is unclear to you.

I'm comparing the US government in an era when slavery was legal, the era which the apology will be/is issued for, with the Nazi Germany. So, dont apologize for the unclarity, it was on your part.

Next, you will claim that Nazi Germany represented jews as well, since there were jews living there.

What a dumbfuck thing to say.

It might shock you to know...there are even non-white people in political positions! THE HORROR!

Has anyone taken into account that holding the government responsible for past abuses means...wait for it...that the government which happens to represent blacks (and others) and NOT just whites shall be the one taking said responsibility? It could never be 'all about the whites' since frankly, the government doesn't just represent the whites.

In the extremely unlikely event that reperations were ever made...it wouldn't just be white folk paying via their tax dollars.

I love out of one side of his mouth he's claiming that there isn't a level of discrimination against blacks in America to correct and out of the other that blacks have no place in the current government and that's a government by whites. Anyone else notice that?

I'm comparing the US government in an era when slavery was legal, the era which the apology will be/is issued for, with the Nazi Germany. So, dont apologize for the unclarity, it was on your part.

No, you were the one who obviously misread. I was speaking of the government NOW. There is nothing in my post that would lead an person with even average reading comprehension skills to think otherwise.

So the government is being run by whites? But blacks aren't disadvantaged. I find this amusing. You've claimed that whites have ALL the power in this statement (the government is being run by whites) while simultaneously arguing that whites are experiencing discrimination and thus we should apply the "water" to address the "fire" equally to all populations. I love when racists destroy their own arguments. Thank you for admitting the widespread discrimination that still exists.

We are talking about an apology for slavery. So when I refer to the government, I refer to the government who was responsinble for slavery. So, obviously, I'm not referring to the CURRENT government. Try to keep up.

I'm comparing the US government in an era when slavery was legal, the era which the apology will be/is issued for, with the Nazi Germany. So, dont apologize for the unclarity, it was on your part.

This is the same government. It didn't disappear and reappear. It's the same entity. It's equivalent to me being held responsible for a murder I committed in my 20's (I'm 32 now). You don't get to commit attrocities and then say they aren't your attrocities because it's in the past. The Nazi government no longer exists in Germany, so they can't be held responsible, but our government does exist and has not atoned for the past.

I love out of one side of his mouth he's claiming that there isn't a level of discrimination against blacks in America to correct and out of the other that blacks have no place in the current government and that's a government by whites. Anyone else notice that?

Oh I noticed. Either he believes the government does not represent blacks at all...or he simply longs for this to be true. Either way...he's showing his true colours*.

White is, after all, made up of all the colours on the spectrum.

We are talking about an apology for slavery. So when I refer to the government, I refer to the government who was responsinble for slavery. So, obviously, I'm not referring to the CURRENT government. Try to keep up.

Nice try. So are you going to go dig up the politicans who were around during slavery? No? And no one else is suggesting such a thing? The government of today is built upon the government of yesterday.

This, my friend, is called you talking out of your ass to make up for a silly post.

No, you were the one who obviously misread. I was speaking of the government NOW. There is nothing in my post that would lead an person with even average reading comprehension skills to think otherwise.

Has anyone taken into account that holding the government responsible for past abuses means...wait for it...that the government which happens to represent blacks (and others) and NOT just whites shall be the one taking said responsibility? It could never be 'all about the whites' since frankly, the government doesn't just represent the whites.

In the extremely unlikely event that reperations were ever made...it wouldn't just be white folk paying via their tax dollars.

Oh, you may have great reading comprehension skills but your reasoning skills suck. How come a CURRENT government may be responsible for "PAST abuses"? Or do you think time travel is real?

Oh, you may have great reading comprehension skills but your reasoning skills suck. How come a CURRENT government may be responsible for "PAST abuses"? Or do you think time travel is real?

Of course the current government is responsible for past abuses. It is the current government we have all been (until you decided to become a gravedigger) talking about holding responsible for slavery. Not a one of us has discussed (until you tossed it in, like month-old vomit) holding the government responsible IN THE PAST alone.

It's the same government.

The actors change...the system remains.

I'm sorry you have so much difficulty with the basic concepts of your political system.

Nice try. So are you going to go dig up the politicans who were around during slavery? No? And no one else is suggesting such a thing? The government of today is built upon the government of yesterday.

This, my friend, is called you talking out of your ass to make up for a silly post.

It's not even made up of the government of yesterday. It's the same government. There has been no revolution. We're the same country, the same legal entity. A company can't right off it's bills because the CEO dies or is replaced. The "bills' remain owed by the legal entity until the bill is paid, released by the person/group owed or the entity ceases to exist.

As such there are three solutions, America pays what it owes, America ceases to exist or every slave's entire family writes off the debt.

Oh, you may have great reading comprehension skills but your reasoning skills suck. How come a CURRENT government may be responsible for "PAST abuses"? Or do you think time travel is real?

Ha. That's hilarious. When did the US have a revolution that made it not the same government? I'm curious. Out of curiosity, why do we have a national debt if we are not responsible for our past?

It's not even made up of the government of yesterday. It's the same government.

Metaphor for continuity. But you're right...some people might get confused, believing the government is reinvented each election.

Ha. That's hilarious. When did the US have a revolution that made it not the same government? I'm curious. Out of curiosity, why do we have a national debt if we are not responsible for our past?

Wouldn't that be fabulous? Escape all our prior commitments because we made them in the past (you're not my husband, I married you last year!)? Oh wait...but then in the wider sense, other countries could simply dismiss treaties with us by claiming, 'well you aren't the same government we made the deal with'. Wow, a downside to this ridiculous idea!

I agree. I think it's the same with people. I should be able to kick ass as much as I like with no consequences. If you're crippled or infirm, why should I apologize that I'm taking advantage of that. That's tantamount to embracing weakness.

I don't think it's the same with people upon a personal level. I was discussing it upon a political plane, upon which one exploitsb weaknesses to one's own ends.

Wouldn't that be fabulous? Escape all our prior commitments because we made them in the past (you're not my husband, I married you last year!)? Oh wait...but then in the wider sense, other countries could simply dismiss treaties with us by claiming, 'well you aren't the same government we made the deal with'. Wow, a downside to this ridiculous idea!

And we'd have to make all new laws after every election. And new contracts, etc.

"What do you mean this isn't my house? I have the deed. Oh, wait, this deed isn't dated today. Nevermind, I forgot the racists decided there is no such thing as history."

Of course the current government is responsible for past abuses. It is the current government we have all been (until you decided to become a gravedigger) talking about holding responsible for slavery. Not a one of us has discussed (until you tossed it in, like month-old vomit) holding the government responsible IN THE PAST alone.

It's the same government.

The actors change...the system remains.

I'm sorry you have so much difficulty with the basic concepts of your political system.

The system remains? Black people had no right to vote hence they had no representation back then. Today it is different. And you claim the system remains?

I love this. It doesn't matter what racist thing people say, or why they say it, or if they've supported, y'all can't wait to cheerlead it. But hey, you're focused on reason right, not the promotion of the inferiority of black people? That's why you ignore all the reasoned posts and cheerlead the one that doesn't really say anything. I love when you expose your purposes right up front. Kind of like bitching that someone noticed racism and called someone on it. That's really frustrating isn't it. Kind of like calling water wet. I know every time someone says "this water is wet" I start hollering about how unfair it is.

I merely quoted something that is, irrespective of how moralistically you may rave, correct. I neither stated implicitly, nor explicitly, that I held that statement to be a summation of my entire view upon the situation. Try subtlety and guile; it really does work.:)

I don't think it's the same with people upon a personal level. I was discussing it upon a political plane, upon which one exploitsb weaknesses to one's own ends.

Why is it different? Societies are made up of people. Either it's always okay as you claimed, or you're wrong. I'm going with the latter if you haven't guessed. It appears you agree and instead would like to draw odd, arbitrary lines that if a group is large enough they suddenly live by different rules.

The system remains? Black people had no right to vote hence they had no representation back then. Today it is different. And you claim the system remains?

Are you claiming it doesn't?

When exactly did the government change? When exactly did the political system of your nation change? Policies change, laws change...but the system you have now is fundamentally the same as the one way back when.

Seriously...you might consider reading up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_system) on the matter...your lack of understanding is concerning.

I merely quoted something that is, irrespective of how moralistically you may rave, correct. I neither stated implicitly, nor explicitly, that I held that statement to be a summation of my entire view upon the situation. Try subtlety and guile; it really does work.:)

You said quoted for truth. Not quoted for sometimes true. It's amusing to me how racists are continually getting caught in their silly inconsistencies.

I don't need subtlety or guile when your errors in logic are so clear and obvious.

The system remains? Black people had no right to vote hence they had no representation back then. Today it is different. And you claim the system remains?

It's the same legal entity. Are you claiming every time we amend the Constitution that we can erase all of our debts? If that were true we'd make one now and erase the national debt. That'd be great. I'm going to suggest that to my congressman. Forget that it's illegal.

You said quoted for truth. Not quoted for sometimes true. It's amusing to me how racists are continually getting caught in their silly inconsistencies.

I don't need subtlety or guile when your errors in logic are so clear and obvious.

Dear lord....(incidentally, we need a disdainful shake of head smiley)

Just as did not say "sometimes true", neither did I say "universally true". As it happens, black people do play the race card; by no means all of them, however, the source for my quote did not state that every black person always plays the race card. He merely opposed it's use. Hence, so did I.

Really? Who? Last I checked reparations was something asked of the government. From the company in our example. You're not an officer so you won't be held personally responsible. No worries.

Where will these mythical reparations come from?
Taxes.
Who pays taxes?
Oh, wait....

Dear lord....(incidentally, we need a disdainful shake of head smiley)

Just as did not say "sometimes true", neither did I say "universally true". As it happens, black people do play the race card; by no means all of them, however, the source for my quote did not state that every black person always plays the race card. He merely opposed it's use. Hence, so did I.

No, they were promoting racist stereotypes and you agreed, all the while ignoring all of the more reasoned posts. And you're not unique among the racists. You guys can't win on reason, so you just have to state things and hope no one notices. That's why you're not actually presenting an argument. You're just cheerleading. But, hey, I'd get tired of being showing the fallacy of my worldview as well. It must get really old.

Please quote them saying that ALL people who aren't black are responsible. I want to hear that.

I'd like to hear an explanation of why it was appropriate for Rev. Jackson to refer to NYC as "Hymietown".

Why is it different? Societies are made up of people. Either it's always okay as you claimed, or you're wrong. I'm going with the latter if you haven't guessed. It appears you agree and instead would like to draw odd, arbitrary lines that if a group is large enough they suddenly live by different rules.

There is a clear distinction between politics and personal relationships. In politics, only those who fail do not exploit a weakness that suits their ends. Upon a personal level, one should act with compassion, however, compassion in politics leads only to failure.

Where will these mythical reparations come from?
Taxes.
Who pays taxes?
Oh, wait....

Do you believe in taxpayer-funded public education?

Is it your fault that the goods supplied by public education cannot be supplied otherwise?

Where will these mythical reparations come from?
Taxes.
Who pays taxes?
Oh, wait....

That's the problem. If we play that game then since I didn't vote for Bush I should not be required to pay for his war. Since I don't agree with Clinton's policies so why should I pay for them. You can't separate the government form its people, but the fact is the government is a legal entity. It's responsible for the past even if we aren't personally, in the same way a company is responsible for its past even if its entire administration has changed.

Are you claiming it doesn't?

When exactly did the government change? When exactly did the political system of your nation change? Policies change, laws change...but the system you have now is fundamentally the same as the one way back when.

Seriously...you might consider reading up (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_system) on the matter...your lack of understanding is concerning.

So will you claim that the system in ancient Greek cities same as in Sweden now just because both systems are called democracy? True, there has been no revolution in USA but there has been EVOLUTION. The current US system is quite different than the old one in which majority of the citizens (blacks, women) could not vote. Actually, if that OLD USA existed now, it'd called an oligarchy instead of democracy.

Same argument can also be made for European constitutional monarchies, comparing them in 19th century and now, especially comparing the influence
of monarch.

And finally, we are talking about USA which is not my nation.

I'm not racist, I hold opinions on induviduals alone, and anyone that is a racist is automatically filed about 2 notches lower on my likeable scale.

What I hate is the most racist induvidual on the planet as long as they belong to a minority, can call me, )a civil minded, open to opinions, freindly guy) a racist and everyone will take thier fucking side simply because I'm white!

I also hate almost nearly every group along the lines of the ACLU, NAACP type because all they do anymore is act ignorant and cause problems.

I also strongly hold the opinion that affermative action is not necesary. I don't mind having a job I apply for being taken by someone who is obviously more qualified than me... but when it is taken by someone because of thier race or nationality I get pissed off.

1) They can. But you can laugh at them if it's not true.
2) The ACLU and NAACP and like-minded organizations are QUITE necessary and not at all ignorant. They defend people who don't have the wherewithal to defend themselves.
3) Having been on the losing side of the stick on affirmative action, I can't really disagree with you.

There is a clear distinction between politics and personal relationships. In politics, only those who fail do not exploit a weakness that suits their ends. Upon a personal level, one should act with compassion, however, compassion in politics leads only to failure.

The problem is that these actions were not just political. That's the first problem. The second problem is that we do hold governments accountable for violating rights. WE DO. Why shouldn't we hold ourselves accountable?

Where will these mythical reparations come from?
Taxes.
Who pays taxes?
Oh, wait....

Okay. Stop whining about reparations for slavery.
They'll never happen. Your money is safe. End of discussion.

So will you claim that the system in ancient Greek cities same as in Sweden now just because both systems are called democracy? True, there has been no revolution in USA but there has been EVOLUTION. The current US system is quite different than the old one in which majority of the citizens (blacks, women) could not vote. Actually, if that OLD USA existed now, it'd called an oligarchy instead of democracy.

Same argument can also be made for European constitutional monarchies, comparing them in 19th century and now, especially comparing the influence
of monarch.

And finally, we are talking about USA which is not my nation.

The current US system is the same legal entity. Your arguments are demonstrating different legal entities. I'm sorry you don't know the difference, but it does not an argument make.

Where will these mythical reparations come from?
Taxes.
Who pays taxes?
Oh, wait....
Only true if you also consider yourself personally responsible for the war in Iraq, or perhaps the decision to fill in THAT pothole instead of THIS pothole.

Again...it would be black taxpayers paying for reparations as well. Are black taxpayers personally responsible for slavery?

I'd like to hear an explanation of why it was appropriate for Rev. Jackson to refer to NYC as "Hymietown".

I don't think it was. I think he was entirely in the wrong. Why would anyone assume otherwise?

The current US system is the same legal entity. Your arguments are demonstrating different legal entities. I'm sorry you don't know the difference, but it does not an argument make.

Not all of my arguments:

So will you claim that the system in ancient Greek cities same as in Sweden now just because both systems are called democracy? True, there has been no revolution in USA but there has been EVOLUTION. The current US system is quite different than the old one in which majority of the citizens (blacks, women) could not vote. Actually, if that OLD USA existed now, it'd called an oligarchy instead of democracy.

Same argument can also be made for European constitutional monarchies, comparing them in 19th century and now, especially comparing the influence
of monarch.

And finally, we are talking about USA which is not my nation.

But that was hundreds of years ago...? :confused: :confused:

Right. Now does it make sense that some of our forumites get upset over the idea of being made to pay now for something that happened to people who are no longer alive, done by people who are no longer alive, and administered by a government that has already changed the laws to prohibit such treatment of people?

Same goes for Germany apologizing jews for the genocide during 2nd World War. It's probably no coincidence that in a study where people's patriotic feelings and their feelings of their homeland were asked from people in the EU, that Germany came last on the "are you proud to be a citizen of your own country?" category.

The legacy of guilt and shame never leads to anything good. Ever.

I'd wager it's why you're seeing a resurgence in Nationalism in Germany (albeit still in a limited fashion).

I have a problem with some of the 'victim' mentality that some blacks (and some whites) seem to display. No matter how good their life is, and no matter how accessible they are to the opportunities that are presented to them, (and I do mean accessible) they always find problems and they always find a way to blame it on someone else. I mean God forbid they look at themselves, because they went through 400 years of shit, so they don't have to. Of course this also goes hand in hand with how some blacks won't try to improve themselves because it's not 'black', and they're acting 'white'. Yea, great job, lets stay in the ghetto because dammit, it's the black thing to do.

I also would like to burn Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton at the stakes.

Just an observation: we all respond when its our oxen being gored. You are quite vocal about the discrimination faced by the disabled community, almost in exactly the same way that people are vocal about the discrimination faced by blacks in this country.

This is the same government. It didn't disappear and reappear. It's the same entity. It's equivalent to me being held responsible for a murder I committed in my 20's (I'm 32 now). You don't get to commit attrocities and then say they aren't your attrocities because it's in the past. The Nazi government no longer exists in Germany, so they can't be held responsible, but our government does exist and has not atoned for the past.

The correct analogy would be you at age 4 (somehow) and 32. Despite you are the same "legal entity", you cant be held responsible for the things you did as a child because you were not capable of comprehending the consequences of your actions. As you can see there are legal cutoffs (minor/adult in this case) that frees you of responsibility.

Back to subject, I think the "legal cutoff" here is the evolutionary path that the US goverment followed, that is moving from an all-white government elected only by white men to a goverment elected by all adults.

Now you may disagree with my opinions but to claim that I do not understand the concepts or I have below avarage reading skills is just ridiculous as well as the fact that you get so much heated for something such as this. And I'm sorry for THAT.

I'd like to hear an explanation of why it was appropriate for Rev. Jackson to refer to NYC as "Hymietown".

1. Nice non sequitur. That is completely unrelated to Jocabia's comment.

2. I don't think anyone, including Jesse Jackson, thinks it was appropriate for him to make that comment. Good luck with that strawman.

The correct analogy would be you at age 4 (somehow) and 32. Despite you are the same "legal entity", you cant be held responsible for the things you did as a child because you were not capable of comprehending the consequences of your actions. As you can see there are legal cutoffs (minor/adult in this case) that frees you of responsibility.

Back to subject, I think the "legal cutoff" here is the evolutionary path that the US goverment followed, that is moving from an all-white government elected only by white men to a goverment elected by all adults.

Now you may disagree with my opinions but to claim that I do not understand the concepts or I have below avarage reading skills is just ridiculous as well as the fact that you get so much heated for something such as this. And I'm sorry for THAT.

Meh. So is the First Amendment void because it was adopted prior to the "cut-off"?

When exactly is this cut-off point anyway? When white males all got to vote regardless of whether they owned property? When women got the right to vote? Is the cut-off 1865 or 1964? Why is the status quo acceptable? Do 17-year olds not have rights?

I'm not a huge fan of the concept of reparations as such, but the lengths you are willing to go to oppose the concept is rather telling.

Has anyone taken into account that holding the government responsible for past abuses means...wait for it...that the government which happens to represent blacks (and others) and NOT just whites shall be the one taking said responsibility? It could never be 'all about the whites' since frankly, the government doesn't just represent the whites.

In the extremely unlikely event that reperations were ever made...it wouldn't just be white folk paying via their tax dollars.

Yes, but let's be honest: when people sue a government or an insurance company, they often think of it as "free money" rather than "our taxes/insurance premiums are going up."

Are black taxpayers personally responsible for slavery?

Of course not. And this is one reason that I believe the idea of reparations is ludicrous.

The correct analogy would be you at age 4 (somehow) and 32. Despite you are the same "legal entity", you cant be held responsible for the things you did as a child because you were not capable of comprehending the consequences of your actions. As you can see there are legal cutoffs (minor/adult in this case) that frees you of responsibility. The people in government back in the old days were not children or mentally deficient.

Your analogy is at best, spurious. To label it correct, and assume we'll accept it as such is ridiculous.

The goverment system in the particular state it was in back then was not equivalent to a toddler fumbling foolishly around.

1. Nice non sequitur. That is completely unrelated to Jocabia's comment.

2. I don't think anyone, including Jesse Jackson, thinks it was appropriate for him to make that comment. Good luck with that strawman.

1)I should think that if he thought it inappropriate, he wouldn't have made it.

2)Really? Well, considering we're talking about the wrongs and damage done in the past to keep fostering inequality, I would really like to know why fostering discrimination against another group in this country is at all appropriate. Is it appropriate to foster discrimination against Jews and to by implication assign blame to them for the ills of society?

And it's not a strawman, when some have referred to him as one of the "usual scapegoats'" to point out that his behavior has not been sterling either.

Yes, but let's be honest: when people sue a government or an insurance company, they often think of it as "free money" rather than "our taxes/insurance premiums are going up."

How is this relevant? That if people stopped and thought about how it might come out of their own pockets, they wouldn't support it?

I doubt that highly.

I don't understand why the slave trade must be singled out. There are vast amounts of things the US government did that had huge damaging effects on society and the economy. The government isn't paying reparations for these actions.

I don't understand why the slave trade must be singled out. There are vast amounts of things the US government did that had huge damaging effects on society and the economy. The government isn't paying reparations for these actions.

Um...the government you speak of isn't paying reparations for slavery either.

The US government has a lot to answer for. Take, for example, US inteventionism in Latin America...

But until the affected people actually gain political power WITHIN the US, that issue isn't going to be brought to the table.

I don't understand why the slave trade must be singled out. There are vast amounts of things the US government did that had huge damaging effects on society and the economy. The government isn't paying reparations for these actions.

You have a point. I don't hear anyone talking seriously about reparations to the Native Americans or to Japanese Americans (outside of those actually interned, or their children).

I don't get it.

So if a company did a thing, then the company changed, got re-arraged, re-grouped and so forth, why does the new cabinet of that company get to pay for something that the other cabinet that formed the company long ago did?

You have a point. I don't hear anyone talking seriously about reparations to the Native Americans or to Japanese Americans (outside of those actually interned, or their children).

Lack of political clout.

Reparations for internment were based on the internment...so why would they be made further than that?

Lack of political clout.

Reparations for internment were based on the internment...so why would they be made further than that?

Well, it could be argued that since we're talking about reparations for slavery, which ended quite a while ago, and that no living victims still exist, an argument could be made that reparations should continue for internment victims, which was much more recent.

Not saying it's logical, just saying it could be argued.

And again: the injustice done to the Native Americans seems to be glossed over and ignored -- and it was much earlier and has carried on to present day.

Just trying to understand the differences.

Well, it could be argued that since we're talking about reparations for slavery, which ended quite a while ago, and that no living victims still exist, an argument could be made that reparations should continue for internment victims, which was much more recent.

Not saying it's logical, just saying it could be argued.

And again: the injustice done to the Native Americans seems to be glossed over and ignored -- and it was much earlier and has carried on to present day.

Just trying to understand the differences.

Unless you propose that we not consider ANY reparations until ALL reparations possibly owed are considered, then there isn't really much point in trying to understand the difference. The population of descendants of slaves in the US is considerably higher than the population of Native Americans and Japanese descendents/victims of internment COMBINED. It seems obvious that the issue of political clout is key here.

Once again, on the internment issue...I don't get where you're coming from. Were there payments made? We paid out to victims/survivors/direct family here. The payments were based on the amount of time an individual was interred, and account was taken of property that had been seized. Why would payments have continued after that?

1)I should think that if he thought it inappropriate, he wouldn't have made it.

Nice to know no one ever makes mistakes in your world. No one ever says something they regret or didn't mean.

As I noted, no one -- including Jackson -- is arguing the comment was appropriate. To the contrary, the man apologized. That doesn't make it alright, but it defeats your strawman argument that someone thinks it was acceptable.

2)Really? Well, considering we're talking about the wrongs and damage done in the past to keep fostering inequality, I would really like to know why fostering discrimination against another group in this country is at all appropriate. Is it appropriate to foster discrimination against Jews and to by implication assign blame to them for the ills of society?

Holy smokes, Batman, I was about to award reparations to black America, but then I saw that a black man said something stupid and racist 23 years ago.

Good catch, Robin, that was a close one.

And it's not a strawman, when some have referred to him as one of the "usual scapegoats'" to point out that his behavior has not been sterling either.

I referred to Jackson as a one of the "usual scapegoats" and you've shown why that reference is accurate.

The people in government back in the old days were not children or mentally deficient.

Your analogy is at best, spurious. To label it correct, and assume we'll accept it as such is ridiculous.

The goverment system in the particular state it was in back then was not equivalent to a toddler fumbling foolishly around.

Ah...one of the many points you failed to comprehend...The analogy here is not about mental incapacity but about change. Change from 4 years old to 32 years old and change from all white government elected by white men to a government elected by all adults.

Geography, probably, combined with historical variables.


And Africans themselves have no responsibility?


Because the other reasons make little sense, or don't correlate with the evidence.


What evidence? You are not backing anything up.


Like the notion that "culture" is somehow an arbitrary feature occurring in a vacuum that somehow randomly pops up when minority populations suffer from systemic racism and long-term economic deprivation.


Part of the black culture is their accents and that's related to their origins in Africa. There you go. Proof that racism isnt the cause of everything. Btw, are you black by any chance?



There are hair colors and eye colors that are more prominent than others. People with those hair colors and eye colors do not dominate over those without them.......


Non-blonds and non-red heads do dominate.




Not to anywhere near the same degree.



Should we use more health care resources on them? All else being equal, yes.

But since the inequality they suffer from is not in the area of education or employment opportunities, affirmative action is not the correct remedy to that inequality.


Why? Someone who knows that genetically, s/he is more prone to cancer may do poorer in his/her studies, believing everything is futile. There are lots of factors, besides race, that effect performance in education and employment.


I think wasting water on all those houses that aren't on fire is silly. But that's just me.


Still wrong analogy. Allowing everyone to choose is not putting out fire. If blacks dont want to see a white on TV, they can watch BEN. But whites who dont want to see blacks on TV have no option. If you want to see everyone, you can watch regular TV. Or an animal documantary in Discovery if you are not in mood for humans.


Why aren't they affected by American culture as such?

Why Black American culture specifically?

Perhaps because their experiences of systemic racism are similar?

Perhaps. Perhaps they feel closer to Black Americans and hence more affected.

"So because you weren't a part of the company when it screwed up and you're not an officer, the COMPANY isn't responsible for addressing it's mistakes? Does that resemble an argument to you? Sorry, I mean does that resemble a GOOD argument to you?"---Jocabia

the 'company' you refer to does not exist. The collection of people that made up that company no longer exists. A new collection under the same name exists, but a name does not make you responsible for the actions of someone else.

The correct analogy would be you at age 4 (somehow) and 32. Despite you are the same "legal entity", you cant be held responsible for the things you did as a child because you were not capable of comprehending the consequences of your actions. As you can see there are legal cutoffs (minor/adult in this case) that frees you of responsibility.

Back to subject, I think the "legal cutoff" here is the evolutionary path that the US goverment followed, that is moving from an all-white government elected only by white men to a goverment elected by all adults.

Now you may disagree with my opinions but to claim that I do not understand the concepts or I have below avarage reading skills is just ridiculous as well as the fact that you get so much heated for something such as this. And I'm sorry for THAT.

Ha. So the government of the US can be said to have not been responsible for its actions? Are you kidding me? If so, on what day did it become the legal entity it is today? Because according to the law, the law you wish to ignore, it's the same government and has always been a valid legal entity.

Legal entity is not an opinion. The government is one and has been the same one since it was founded. That's not opinion. That's irrefutable and if you don't know that, then you don't understand.

I'm not a huge fan of the concept of reparations as such, but the lengths you are willing to go to oppose the concept is rather telling.

That's the funny part, I'm not either, but the claim that the US is a different US or that it's holding people responsible for something they didn't do is just ludicrous and complete misunderstanding of the legal status of the US government.

I personally don't think they would do anything worthwhile. They would not repair anything. I think a more significant "apology" would be to take said money and focus it on improving education in the inner city or the like.

"So because you weren't a part of the company when it screwed up and you're not an officer, the COMPANY isn't responsible for addressing it's mistakes? Does that resemble an argument to you? Sorry, I mean does that resemble a GOOD argument to you?"---Jocabia

the 'company' you refer to does not exist. The collection of people that made up that company no longer exists. A new collection under the same name exists, but a name does not make you responsible for the actions of someone else.

This is patently false. The US is a legal entity and it's the same legal entity as it was when it was founded. To ignore this is to ignore fact.

Ah...one of the many points you failed to comprehend...The analogy here is not about mental incapacity but about change. Change from 4 years old to 32 years old and change from all white government elected by white men to a government elected by all adults.

Amusing. Didn't you just suggest that I was getting to upset when I said you were misunderstanding and then you say the same. Hypocrite much?

Meanwhile, if it's not about mental incapacity then the analogy of the four-year-old is inappropriate, since that's the only difference between my analogy and yours.

You don't get it. The US government is a legal entity and despite your trying to ignore that, it hasn't become a different legal entity. While I might evolve throughout my life, I am still legally responsible for things I may not still agree with. Change is not good enough to make the you not legally responsible. Your four-year-old analogy requires that the four-year-old not be able to be responsible.

"So because you weren't a part of the company when it screwed up and you're not an officer, the COMPANY isn't responsible for addressing it's mistakes? Does that resemble an argument to you? Sorry, I mean does that resemble a GOOD argument to you?"---Jocabia

the 'company' you refer to does not exist. The collection of people that made up that company no longer exists. A new collection under the same name exists, but a name does not make you responsible for the actions of someone else.

Ah...one of the many points you failed to comprehend...The analogy here is not about mental incapacity but about change. Change from 4 years old to 32 years old and change from all white government elected by white men to a government elected by all adults.
OK, once again, slowly, for the people who seem unable to follow this simple concept:

"Legal Entity" =/= specific group of individuals.

"Legal Entity" can also be an organization that continues to exist even when its membership and leadership change.

Thus, a government is a "legal entity." It continues to exist as a single legal entity, no matter how many personnel changes it goes through. It is ALWAYS the same government.

Likewise, a company is a "legal entity" that continues to exist no matter how many personnel changes it undergoes.

Now, consider: When you enter a cell phone service contract with, for example, Verizon, who are you entering the contract with? Who delivers the phone service? What do you write on your bill payment checks in the space for "Pay to the order of"?

Is it Verizon? Or is it some person, some individual executive at Verizon? It is the company, obviously. Now, say the CEO of Verizon retires and is replaced? Let's say the whole executive suite of Verizon's central offices is replaced at once. Does that erase your service contract? No, it does not, because you were never doing business with those people. You were doing business with Verizon, and Verizon still exists, without any interruptions.

Now apply this to the government. Who do you pay your taxes to? George Bush? No, you pay them to the US Government Department of Internal Revenue. No matter how many presidents or congresses this country goes through, no matter how many directors of the IRS may come and go, your taxes are always collected by the same entity.

So the specious argument that "the company" does not exist because the "collection of people" who make it up have changed is bunk, as a point of fact. If Verizon incurs a debt, then the new management of Verizon are responsible for that debt. If the government does something wrong, then the new leadership of the government are responsible for making it right.

As to the equally specious argument that the government should not be held responsible for something it did because it did it when it was too young to know any better and certainly wouldn't do it now, they really really promise -- please, give me a break. The United States has never been run by children who did not know how to run a country, and there were many centuries of history to show them the wrongness of slavery by example, if they needed to be shown.

And finally to the suggestion that many people have made that we should forget about slavery because it happened long ago, let me explain this: For some crimes there is no statute of limitations -- no expiration date beyond which it can no longer be prosecuted. There is no expiration date for murder, for instance, and there is no expiration date for crimes against humanity committed by governments, for which category slavery qualifies.

That's the funny part, I'm not either, but the claim that the US is a different US or that it's holding people responsible for something they didn't do is just ludicrous and complete misunderstanding of the legal status of the US government.

I personally don't think they would do anything worthwhile. They would not repair anything. I think a more significant "apology" would be to take said money and focus it on improving education in the inner city or the like.
Reparations in the form of pay-outs to individual black Americans would be a nonsensical gesture -- not to mention practically unfeasible. It will never happen and should never happen. It would be dumb.

I totally agree that better action to correct social inequality would be a far more effective "apology." This is definitely one of those situations in which I would say to my government, "Don't apologize. Improve."