Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,807 Year: 3,064/9,624 Month: 909/1,588 Week: 92/223 Day: 3/17 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Black Rednecks and White Liberals (by Thomas Sowell)
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 38 of 130 (377559)
01-17-2007 2:18 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by crashfrog
01-17-2007 1:02 PM


Re: Tom Sowell
So now it's about choices, is it? And you know better than millions of people what choices they should make? Well, that's "small-government conservatism" for you.
Buying rims when you're dirt poor instead of paying your bills and taking care of business is just stupid, to put it as bluntly as I can. Obviously, not everyone that owns rims is poor. Its not about the rims, its about how a mentality that compels people to make a bad choice.
quote:
No, I'm poor. I don't have that luxury.
So, naturally, you begrudge those that do. Especially if they're an "uppity nigger."
More fabrications, distortions, and lies to further your agenda. If I can't afford a nicety, which rims are, because they have no other function other than looking pretty, then I won't buy them. If any one from any race opted to buy rims when they can't really afford it without neglecting more important matters is just silly.
Why is a more expensive car something someone has to have? Maybe they like their old car, and they want some rims on it.
Have you ever heard of the phrase, "you get what you pay for?" If you buy a used 91 Honda Civic, chances are, you're not very wealthy. If you bought a vehicle like that for $300.00 outright, you're probably not doing it because you like 91 Honda Civic's. Slapping rims on that moving scrap metal tells me that somebody has their priorities all out of whack. Are you seriously going to disagree with that?
I seriously don't see what you're on about, except for a big ol' helping of self-pity mixed in with some class envy.
Self-pity mixed in with class envy? LOL! I'm speaking about people with class envy, remember? People who buy rims as if we're somehow going to overlook the fact that the car needs a jumpstart every time they get to a stoplight.
Bizzare to white people, you mean.
No Crash. I already advanced two names. How good are Sunbow's chances of being taken seriously? How about Billy Bob?
Answer the question. Are "Yoshi" or "Sergio" weird names? Or do you recognize those names as entirely normal in the cultures that they're from?
I recognize them from the cultures that they derive from.
So why not extend the same break to black people?
You're the only one that says they don't. I'm simply telling you that its been demonstrably shown that giving your child an odd name lessons their chances later in life. I agree with you that its a bunch of BS, but it exists. You are trying to set up for yourself some kind of monopoly where that only extends to you black people when that isn't true.
Names like "Condoleeza", after all, are completely normal and natural to the culture in which those names belong.
I doubt that Condoleeza is very common anywhere. In fact, in the African-American culture there is an attempt for many families to have for their children completely uniquely invented names.
But because you flag them as "black" (and because it's becoming pretty clear you have some major racist tendancies), they're suddenly "bizzare".
LOL! More of your lies. I haven't spoken about Condoleeza Rice in a positive light? Haven't spoken about MLK in a positive light? How about Thomas Sowell? How about Malcolm X? No, not Malcolm X because he was a racist, among other things. You are making so that I can't say anything bad about anyone black, otherwise, Crashfrog and the PC police are going to accuse me of "racist tendencies."
This is so beyond ridiculous that I don't even know what I can say about it. You know, in my younger, more militant days, I used to roll with the Florida chapter of the S.H.A.R.P's. I physically fought Nazi-skins over their beliefs, until I realized that it was terribly counterproductive.
I'm telling you that exact situation happened over and over again, in the research. Identical resumes (with the exception of the felony conviction added to the white man's application), different names, much greater likelihood of the white application/resume getting called back than the black one, even with the felony conviction on the white application.
I'd really love to see this study. Who conducted it and what were the parameters of the study?
Who you think were rednecks?
That's my whole point Crash. How can rednecks, by today's standard, be upset with blacks today who have retained the very behavior of their own ancestors, the antebellum rednecks?
No, you're not from the South.
What? I was as far south as it gets? Or, by that, do you mean that because I lived in Florida, I couldn't really be considered from the South? I've heard it said that Floridians are just "Southern Yankees's".

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by crashfrog, posted 01-17-2007 1:02 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 39 by crashfrog, posted 01-17-2007 2:35 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 40 by docpotato, posted 01-17-2007 7:04 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 43 by kuresu, posted 01-17-2007 10:44 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 45 by arachnophilia, posted 01-17-2007 11:38 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 47 by nator, posted 01-18-2007 10:02 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 57 by Lithodid-Man, posted 01-19-2007 4:21 AM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 100 by AdminBuzsaw, posted 01-21-2007 2:00 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 51 of 130 (377854)
01-18-2007 5:23 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by crashfrog
01-17-2007 2:35 PM


Re: Tom Sowell
quote:
Buying rims when you're dirt poor instead of paying your bills and taking care of business is just stupid, to put it as bluntly as I can.
And, what's your evidence that this is prevalent?
Go to any major city in the United States. Done deal.
Your assumptions about lazy niggers?
You shouldn't use such a nasty word. But just so you know this argument extends to any one who buys rims they can't really afford. You say that I have class envy, but I'm not the one buying thousand dollar rims to put on my piece of crap, nor am I defending those who do. Consequently, you are. What are you trying to say about yourself?
you think a mentality that promotes flashy purchases at the expense of intelligent ones is limited soley to black urban culture?
No, no, of course not. I've seen people of every race do that. I blame this counter culture in America for that. They are the purveyors, not some of the young, urban blacks. As far as I see it, they victims of it, along with any one else who buys in to that nonsense. Really, my argument, and so is Sowell's, is not an argument against black people, its an argument against liberal's-- though I should make clear again that its not all blacks and its not all liberals.
And what's your evidence that black people, in large part, are doing this? I've never even met a black person with expensive rims.
Never? Well, maybe you live in a cracker jack box. I don't know what to tell you.
You're not rich, no, but you're clearly budget conscious. And, in fact, if you knew you wanted to pop some fancy rims on that car, you might very well decide to save money on the car - Civics get great gas milage, are comfortable, and have an excellently low cost of ownership.
I'm not knocking Civics or rims. That's all fine in great in proportion to your economic status. If someone can afford rims without neglecting weightier matters, that's fine. But if you're rolling around on a roller skate with some bling-bling, that tells me that someone's priorities are all messed up. If they are willing to neglect the very car that the rims is meant to accentuate, then what else are they neglecting?
But, apparently, when a black person makes decisions about how they want to spend their money, they're just a shiftless nigger. Of course, a white person making strategic decisions about how to spend their money is being intelligent.
Crash, I don't give a rat's ass who does it-- white, black, asian, hispanic, whatever. Its just stupid to buy rims which have absolutely no practical purpose whatsoever, when more important things, such as, but not limited to buying a car that is going to run longer than a week.
But those aren't the names we're talking about. "Sunbow" is a goofy name, except in hippy culture. And I'm sure William Robert does just fine in the job hunt, thank you very much.
Maybe to a lot of people "Shaniqua" is a goofy name. I can't reiterate enough that its very fickle of people to base important matters off of a name, but it does happen.
It's still not clear to me why you find "Cornelius" a "bizzare" name, when "Yoshi" and "Sergio" and "Gunter" are entirely normal names.
Cornelius isn't really weird. And to add, names like Cornelius and Jerome were very prevalent names in America during the 1700 and 1800's. Yoshi sounds remarkably Japanese, which is common to that society. Sergio sounds remarkably from Spanish decent. Cornelius sounds either Olde English to me.
Well, I should say that it is clear - you're racist.
Yeah, you got me pegged. Remind me again why I wouldn't just tell you if I was? I have no qualms telling you that I disagree with homosexuality. If I was truly racist why wouldn't I just let you know that? Its not like I'm afraid of the p.c. police. It doesn't make any sense to me.
No. What I'm trying to do is make it so that you can't argue from racist assumptions without it being explicit how racist you're being. Those assumptions would be:
1) black people are lazy and don't know how to spend money
2) black people are all rednecks
3) black people are too dumb not to give their children bizzare names
Oh my gosh... More distortions.
Crashfrog, I never said that black people are lazy and don't know how to spend money. I'm speaking on an INDIVIDUAL level. I never said black people are rednecks. I'm telling you that Sowell says that the preponderance of the ghetto culture derives its modes of speech and mannerisms from antebellum Southerns, which itself was derived from the Scot Highlanders. Lastly, I've never said or made allusions to black people being dumb because some of them give their kids unique names. You've fabricated this. This is your fantasy, not mine.
I've already linked it, so if this were true you'd already have seen it. You refused to open PDF's, remember? For someone who would "love to see" some studies, you're doing jack-all to make that possible. What do I have to fucking do, print them out and hand-deliver them to Oregon?
Only if you take me for a spin in your ride after words. What kind of rims do you have?
No, because you think that Southern culture includes nobody but rednecks, you can't possibly be from the south. If you think "redneck" describes the plantation-owning upper-class whites of the antebellum south, you've never lived far enough south to know what a "redneck" is.
And how have you deduced this? There are different kinds of southerns. The one's in living in Alabama are vastly different from North Carolinians.
Rednecks are poor whites from Appalachia
Actually, those are hillbillies.
You're as far off the mark to call them "rednecks" as I would be if I tried to tell you that Daniel Goldman, a Jewish lawyer who lives in a flat in Manhattan's Upper East Side, is a "redneck".
Stranger things have happened. Besides, the term "redneck" is pretty much ambiguous. However, I think people generally consider themselves a redneck if they are immersed within the southern culture. It once was a derisive term, but some southerns seem to derive a level of pride in referring to themselves as rednecks.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by crashfrog, posted 01-17-2007 2:35 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by crashfrog, posted 01-18-2007 10:07 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 130 (377868)
01-18-2007 6:27 PM
Reply to: Message 43 by kuresu
01-17-2007 10:44 PM


Re: A lesson on the south and rednecks
I've never, ever heard of it being part of the "Deep South" or any other "southern" culture.
It used to be but that really started to go away in the early 70's. I mean, if you go to Pensacola or Tallahasee, there still exists a remnant of southern mentality. But in Miami its all but gone for sure. In fact, Miami has its own thing going on. I've never been to anywhere else quite like it. And until recently, I didn't realize that it has its own accent. I obviously didn't hear it growing up, but now that I haven't lived there in quite a few years, when I speak to friends back home, I hear it big time.
Especially in reference to the antebellum south. See, Florida was purchased from Spain (or Mexico--I just can't seem to remember just when the US did acquire the territory, and depending on when it did happen, Mexico was either a colony or a separate country.
Spain were the owners.
What the hell did it do during the Civil War?
There was a level of neutrality in Florida. I think most Floridians considered themselves southerns, but there was no real strategic value in Florida at that time. Besides, the small Army contingent was too busy fighting with Seminoles at that time to really care.
As far as I'm concerned, the south is Virginia, Tennessee, North and South Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Mississippi, Arkansas, Louisiana, and Texas. Texas is a bit of an oddball.
I see it as Virginia, the Carolina's, Georgia, Mississippi, Alabama, Louisiana, Tennessee, Kentucky and Arkansas.
Texas, Oklahoma, and Florida kind of have their own thing going on.
The reason Florida is not part of the "south" is culture--it is hispanic/spanish, and this is what makes Texas so wierd.
Yeah, but the hispanic culture is still predominantly contained within South Florida. There are still many places, particularly in Central Florida and the Panhandle that are very typical to southern culture. As far as Texas, its always been considered a frontier state-- or a Western state.
Rednecks, hillbillies, and mountain folk are the descendants of Scot-Irish men.
I see Rednecks as true Southerners. I see Hillbillies as mountain folk, like West Virginia. But yes, most are descended from Scots-Irish, Welsh and German. The British from that region mainly came from Ulster county.
There is a difference between the three, too (though I'm not postive mountain folk is an appropriate term). The rednecks are your crude, oftimes NASCAR fan, person. They also display a tendency to wave the confederate flag and can be unashamedly racist.
Yes, many of them are attached to the stereotype whether they like it or not.
Hillbillies are about or less crude., but worse off. Think living in the hills of Carolina. They also had a tendency to live away from mountains--your poor farmer close to the plantation.
My grandmother on my father's side is a second generation Irish-German. She lives in the Black Mountains of North Carolina. She ended up marrying my grandfather who was an Ecuadorian man who went to the U of North Carolina. During that time, there was little to no exposure to any hispanic people.
I, fortunately, did not grow up in Redneck central. I grew up in the middle of them all, but they, for the most part, lived outside of Bristol. I can't stand them, honestly.
Bristol? I assume you aren't speaking about the UK...?
You say you grew up in Miami. Sorry, but that ain't the "south".
No, it certainly isn't. In fact, its so far south its more like South America than it is Southern America.
I consider myself a southern, and a proud Virginian.
Virginia is a strange state, in that, it has both Northern and Southern influences. I lived in Virginia Beach for awhile, which was vastly different from say, Richmond. Well, maybe not "vastly," but I'd say there is a noticeable difference.
(one last bit--if Sowell really did say that blacks had no one else to emulate other than rednecks, he doesn't know the south--'cause as crash said, it's more than rednecks down there. decent people live there, no matter their conservative bend)
I'm not knocking anyone here and neither is Sowell. But in the antebellum South, there was no one else but each other to influence. None of this should surprise anyone that the North and South didn't merely dislike each other for political reasons. It went down to the bone and across the ocean, in that, the aristocratic Brits and the Scots/Irish have always been at enmity with one another.
"Centuries before "black pride" became a fashionable phrase within the contemporary vernacular, there was "cracker pride-- and it was very much the same kind of pride. It was not pride in any particular achievement or set of behavioral standards or moral principles adhered to. It was a touchiness about anything that might be even remotely construed as a personal slight, much less an insult, combined with a willingness to erupt into violence over it. New Englanders were baffled about this kind of pride among crackers. Observing such people, the Yankess could not understand what they had to feel proud about."
(Crash elucidates Sowell's point here with his touchiness and his slander about me that seems to me, so out of place and a far departure from what I'm actually saying.)
(one more last bit--if you really thought that the slave masters were rednecks, man are you wrong. The majority of all slaves were owned by upperclass plantation owners--Anglicans. Very few hillbillies, rednecks, or mountain people owned slaves--they were too expensive. The slave culture is also really interesting, and did not copy elements of redneck mannerisms and culture.)
Yes, everyone owned slaves. When I say "rednecks," I am using Sowell's definition of Southerns who were markedly different, culturally, from their Northern counterparts. Sowell offers one oratory by a writer coming from the late 1800's.
He writes:
"Even when there was no conflict or hostility involved,, Southerns often showed a reckless disregard for human life, including their own. For example, the racing of steamboats that happened to encounter each other on the rivers of the South that often ended with exploding boilers, especially when excited competition led to the tying down of safety valves in order to build up pressure which would generate more speed. An impromptu race between steamboats that encountered each other on the Mississippi illustrates the patter:

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 43 by kuresu, posted 01-17-2007 10:44 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by kuresu, posted 01-18-2007 8:07 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 53 of 130 (377875)
01-18-2007 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by Wounded King
01-18-2007 9:30 AM


Re: Racist abuse of the scots.
quote:
The reality is that this mentality is borrowed from the white rednecks of the antebellum South, which is borrowed from the Highland's of Scotland.
Anything to support this rather insulting contention with a comparison of the elements of this 'mentality' in the Scottish Highlands at the time? I'm not a highlander myself but while I can see how Scottish and Irish Pioneers may have influenced the culture of the south, I'm certainly not sure I see where the need for a sweet set of chrome rims comes from in the Scottish highlands?
We have some really touchy people on EvC. I'm not making fun of you, all Scotsmen, all blacks, all rednecks, all people who have rims, all liberals, etc. I'm simply relaying what Sowell alleges. I just happen to agree because his study is very in depth, not to mention, this goes along with my own observations. Its not like he's flying by the seat of his pants about all of this.
Furthermore, I have a great deal of Scots-blood coursing through my own veins. Much of my mother's side of the family happens to come from the South too. Do I make fun of myself about being a Scot or a Redneck anymore than Sowell makes fun of himself for being black? Obviously not. That's because there really is nothing different about people aside from minor variances in skin color, or the consistency of hair, or a predisposition to certain diseases or cancers. There is no difference mentally. The differences do, however, come from variances in mentality-- or sociology-- or culture. And THIS is where true racism comes from. Its a lack of understanding from culture to culture. All of a sudden, you are marked by the way you look, as people will prejudge one another because they presuppose the stereotype.
So, when Sowell says that the vast preponderance of American black culture derives some of its ill-behavior from the South, and the South derives some its ill-behavior from Highlanders, he isn't making fun of anyone, nor am I. That doesn't mean that negro's, rednecks, or highlanders are some slack-jawed yokels that extends permeates the entire culture. He is simply making a cultural observation consistent with history. And that observation doesn't mean that we have to live up to these stereotypes.
Whether its kept hush out of respect for fellow members of EvC, I'm sure there exists a consensus in Europe about how 'unrefined' the Americans are. Even if they did secretly harbor this animosity, they would make a pretty good point if the Jerry Springer show is the basis for comparison. Does that mean that all Europeans look down on all Americans? No, certainly not. Does that mean that all Americans behave the way its portrayed on the Jerry Springer show? Certainly not. However, stereotypes, whether offensive or not, don't spring out of thin air.
Therefore, I think it would behoove everyone not to be offended. I mean, am I really saying anything that so unbelievably egregious? I don't think so. But if so, explain to me why and what I can do to alleviate any misunderstandings.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by Wounded King, posted 01-18-2007 9:30 AM Wounded King has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by Wounded King, posted 01-19-2007 4:25 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 54 of 130 (377878)
01-18-2007 7:29 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by nator
01-18-2007 10:02 AM


Re: Tom Sowell
Well, ok, but what does this have to do with race?
Absolutely nothing. Its about culture, not race. What happens is that a culture often comes about because people tend to feel comfortable within their own race. And when segregation is either thrust upon a culture, such as was imposed upon the American negro, a sub-culture can develop.
Likewise, sometimes a race will segregate themselves to a degree because its within their comfort zone. And so, the sociology "appears" as though it has do with race when it, in fact, has nothing to do with it.
If you think about it, its just a vicious cycle until someone breaks it.
Take America for instance. Its unquestionable that latent racist tendencies afflict people of all races. But when they come together out of some commonality, nobody much cares. Sometimes there is conflict between anglo and negro, but things like sports or music take that away. Or look at what happens in the military. We have whites and blacks, for instance, that might not otherwise see much in common with another. But you give them a commonality, like fighting insurgents in Iraq or Afghanistan, and none of that matters. They're all American. Or on a sports team no one cares about that. Or a jazz quartet of mixed race-- nobody cares. They just want to play good music.
Its when we segregate ourselves that these animosities begin to fester.
We can even look at it in terms of ideologies. Liberals and Conservatives don't much like each other. But a black liberal may find more things in common with a white liberal, than a black conservative. Likewsie, a white conservative may find more in common with a black conservative, than that same white conservative may find with a white liberal.
The point is, racism is just one facet of the "Us :vs: Them" mentality that cuts to the core in all humans. I don't think its a virtue that any of us esteems, but it is a reality. Its going to take a very deep understanding to bridge these gaps.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by nator, posted 01-18-2007 10:02 AM nator has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 61 of 130 (378033)
01-19-2007 11:13 AM
Reply to: Message 55 by kuresu
01-18-2007 8:07 PM


Re: A lesson on the south and rednecks
your statement: "Yes, everyone owned slaves" is patently false.
When I say that everyone owned slaves, I'm speaking about the continental United States, I'm speaking about all of human history. There has never been a time where slavery has not existed in some for. Even now slavery still persists.
So who owned the majority of the slaves? The rich people--generally speaking, the "cultured" english (well, descendants). If anything, who would have had the most influence on thier behavior?
I agree that the more money a person has, the more slaves they own. And aside from the occasional Virginian or South Carolinian aristocrat, the majority of wealth was horded in northern states. Having said that, what then does that mean for the southern negro? You think they walked around has freemen because nobody could afford them? No. They are just sold for less.
I'm not a true southerner?
If you're from the South, then you're a southerner.
Are the people of Charleston rednecks? How about Richmond? Is Memphis a town of rednecks? Or what of Nashville? How about New Orleans? If you answer yes to any of these, than you've never met a redneck.
There are thousands of rednecks in any of those given cities, but least of all, Richmond. You say rednecks are NASCAR fans. Not only is that a bad description, but northerners like NASCAR too. What is your basis for assimilation?
Hillbillies are NOT just mountain folk.
I really don't feel like arguing over the etymology of hillbillies and rednecks, so I'll just post the definition and be done with it.
"Often Disparaging and Offensive. a person from a backwoods or other remote area, esp. from the mountains of the southern U.S."
There's a movie--about the rediscovery of the old english ballads in the Appalachains--that accurately portrays this last class.
Cold Mountain?
(I don't know if you'd consider Jacksonville north enough, but it has a feel somewhat like Charleston.)
Yes, and yes.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by kuresu, posted 01-18-2007 8:07 PM kuresu has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by kuresu, posted 01-19-2007 12:38 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 130 (378057)
01-19-2007 12:13 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by crashfrog
01-18-2007 10:07 PM


Re: Tom Sowell
The plural of "anecdote" is not "data." What's your evidence?
What is your evidence to the contrary? Its a matter of statistical fact that American blacks do more poorly than anyone else in the United States. However, Caribbean or African blacks and other minorities fare much better and are among some of the upper crust as far as it relates to scholarship. So what does that mean? That means that the negro is no different than anyone else, least of all, people of the same race in different parts of the world. That means its a matter of sociology, not biology.
The liberal mantra is that its racism. This is such a specious plea because blacks have the same chance to excel as anyone else, especially in the public school system that go out of their way to try and ensure their success. Its not racism. Its an unwillingness due to a culturally lax attitude that hinders them. You are trying to pass the blame on anyone except the obvious.
Which is as likely to be a white kid living with his parents in Suburbia as anybody else. (Like mc chris says, white kids love hip-hop.) Which pretty much undercuts your entire racial argument.
Its not racial, its cultural. And white kids living in suburbia, ahem, can afford rims.
So, then, it really doesn't have anything to do with race, or with ancient Scotsmen pimping their rides up in the Highlands, does it?
No, which is what I've been saying all along. You just want so badly for me to be a racist so you can justify yourself that you haven't been listening to anything I've been saying. Its cultural. The proof is that when removed from an ill-gotten culture, blacks anywhere else in the world are as successful as anyone else. Its liberal mentality that is shackling the average American negro to plantation mentality and pawning it off as if it were a genuine aspect of African culture. It isn't African by any stretch of the imagination, its a redneck culture.
don't you ever watch "Pimp My Ride"? Whose rides are they always pimping? White kids'. And who's doing the pimping?
I've never seen it so I can't offer my analysis.
quote:
Maybe to a lot of people "Shaniqua" is a goofy name.
Yes. Racist people. That's the point.
And what about Billy Bob? I'll bet if I conducted my own experiment, I could justify the same accusation for Billy Bob. Let me ask you something: is anyone other than white Anglo-Americans capable of spewing racist ideals?
Can you name me one racist who will come out and tell you they're a racist?
Anyone from any white pride or white power movement. They'll tell you.
Everybody, even the racists, knows that being racist is bad. They say all kinds of shit as a smokescreen - "I'm no racist, but..." "Now, some of my best friends are black, but..." "No prejudice on my part, but the data..." - but they're easily picked out by their arguments.
You mean like the Nation of Islam who is notoriously racist? Do you have a problem with Minister Farakahn and his bizarre message? His message sounds just as fanatical and dangerous as any member from any white identity movement. But for some odd reason, those of the liberal persuasion tend to give them a pass simply because they're black. That's not only absurd, but its hypocritical.
1) You've mistakenly conflated antebellum upper-class southerners with lower-class Appalachian mountain people and field laborers (aka "red-necks")
I've done nothing of the such, but even supposing that I did, the point is that the American black culture does not derive from African origins, but rather, from the bad manners of antebellum southern whites.
2) Your example is fly rims on cars, but neither the antebellum southerners, nor the rednecks, nor the Scots had cars. Even generalizing to a personal failing of putting conspicuous consumption ahead of practical priorities, the rednecks of the south didn't have the money to do that.
My gosh, stop focusing on the rims. The rims is just an example of how priorities have become skewed due to a cultural malcontent.
Hopefully Sowell puts forth a much more intelligent argument than you, because his argument as you've related it is incoherent nonsense.
If Sowell can compose are more cogent argument than myself, more power to him. You could always just read his book too since you don't like my message.
You wanna ride with a guy named "Crash"?
Oooh, good point. Nevermind that.
No, it's really not. It refers to people who have red necks, in other words, sunburned necks from working out in the sun.
Yes, that's where the literal name derives, but it speaks about a culture more than it does people who can get sunburned, i.e. fair skinned people.
The slave owners of the antebellum south didn't work in the sun. They had the slaves do that. And there weren't a lot of poor white people doing that work, either, because they were outcompeted by slaves.
Redneck culture is just that-- a culture. The argument is more of North/South and a liberal/conservative argument than it is a white/black argument.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by crashfrog, posted 01-18-2007 10:07 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-19-2007 12:24 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 65 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2007 1:21 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 67 by tudwell, posted 01-19-2007 7:59 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 68 of 130 (378241)
01-19-2007 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Lithodid-Man
01-19-2007 4:21 AM


Re: Tom Sowell
I had stated in chat that I wouldn't comment in this thread until I read the book (it arrived today and will read it this weekend), but have to comment because this has been on my mind since it was posted.
Great! I can't wait until you finish it. I'm curious to know the opinion of someone else who has read it.
First, I agree with you (and other posters) that it is not infrequent to see people (of any race) spending money on pop items that are or seem frivolous to the outside. What I think is missed is the context. Keeping up with the Joneses is not just a middle class concept. If a poor black man buys expensive rims, or a poor white man buys a 52" television, or whatever it is not some out of context stupid decision (although from outside I think it is a stupid decision). They are buying status (or what they believe to be status) within their circle of friends. It might be poor decision making (I agree) but it isn't because of race or social class.
As I've said before, race literally has nothing to do with it. I believe its purely sociological in nature, as evidenced by the mass purchases of frivolous items in many parts of the world, but particularly, in American society.
I grew up in Washington State. And I know many people who could barely (or not) make their rent, bills, etc. but who had bigass trucks they would lose in a few months. But while they had them they were the man. Sure it was stupid. (but ultimately who was the beneficiary? Couldn't be the car dealership...)
Well, yes, this is the price of vanity.
This transcends economic levels. What is the difference between that and a fly by night actress you see with a $24,000 dress for the Oscars?
Pure vanity. And the shame of it is that she'll probably only wear it once only to be ridiculed in the tabloids as the "Worst Dressed in 2007." Seems rather pointless.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Lithodid-Man, posted 01-19-2007 4:21 AM Lithodid-Man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Lithodid-Man, posted 01-20-2007 7:08 AM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 130 (378245)
01-19-2007 11:17 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Dan Carroll
01-19-2007 12:24 PM


Re: Tom Sowell
quote:
The liberal mantra is that its racism. This is such a specious plea because blacks have the same chance to excel as anyone else, especially in the public school system that go out of their way to try and ensure their success.
This is true. Inner-city schools are so ludicrously over-funded it makes me sick. I mean honestly, enough with the solid gold overhead projecters! It's unnecessary! And you know the teachers are just going out and blowing their overinflated salaries on all-night coke binges and top-shelf hookers.
Its not a matter of how underfunded the American public school system is. I already know that its deplorable. Its a matter of an unwillingness to care enough to make a concerted effort. There are countries far less funded than American public schools, and yet, they know Trigonometry by the age of 13, whereas an incredibly small percentage will never even see Trig in their lives because they can't master basic arithmetic. I indict myself in this, btw. Therefore, its not a matter of what they don't have, but a matter of not using what they do have at their disposal. American society is breeding a very calloused, spoiled society who could give a whit about their success.
Though this pervades a very large percentage of the overall American society, statistics indicate that its particular to American blacks. Why is that? If there is no difference in mental capacity, why does this present itself? Its obviously sociological. And it would take a blind man not to see the connection between attitude and performance.
Outspoken black folk, such as Bill Cosby or Thomas Sowell, have been very vocal about this. And what has happened to them? They've been flamed by the Left as tacit assertions of them being "Uncle Tom's," a truly slanderous terminology for any black (wo)man who refuses to be shackled to the antebellum south mentality that so dominates the ghetto culture today. And it is black folk like Sowell that make the connection of liberals, who want to be intimate friends of the negro, who keeps them in the plantations.
I would agree. I believe fully that the majority of the Left truly does care about the black man, however, it is their approach, no matter how good the intentions, that inevitably holds them back. Why? Because no one holds them accountable? If people like Sowell, or Cosby, or myself seek to TRULY treat them as equals by holding them to the same standards as everyone else, which is equality, we are branded as either racists or Uncle Tom's. And I'm sorry, but that's a steaming load of crap.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Dan Carroll, posted 01-19-2007 12:24 PM Dan Carroll has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by randman, posted 01-19-2007 11:19 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 71 by kuresu, posted 01-19-2007 11:37 PM Hyroglyphx has replied
 Message 74 by crashfrog, posted 01-19-2007 11:58 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 87 by nator, posted 01-20-2007 6:30 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 79 of 130 (378353)
01-20-2007 12:08 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by randman
01-19-2007 11:19 PM


Re: Tom Sowell
awesome post...thanks
I'm glad you liked it.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by randman, posted 01-19-2007 11:19 PM randman has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 80 of 130 (378356)
01-20-2007 12:23 PM
Reply to: Message 71 by kuresu
01-19-2007 11:37 PM


Re: Sowell's wrong
I really enjoy Bill Cosby--its true that the people who don't succeed are to lazy or they never had a chance to begin with. There are black people who make it. what's unfair, is that its much more difficult for them then it is for whites or other ethnic groups.
And why is that? Do negative attitudes about a certain race spring out of the ground for inexplicable reasons? This is irrespective of whether or not any one is actually at fault. I just want you to explain to me why "its much more difficult for them then it is for white or other ethnic groups." Can you explain why that is?
let me remind you again--rednecks ain't responsible for blacks failure in this society.
I agree. What Sowell is doing is tracing the behavior. Everyone is accountable for their own actions.
racism is an isidious, subtle, creeping monster that inhabits every person on this earth. some are just more open about it then others.
Yes, racism is an ugly and nasty thing. That's unquestionable. The problem I have is that people are labeled as racists when they aren't, and some people that actually are racist seem to get a pass. If you started a company called "WET" to be the counterpart of "BET," what kind of flack do you think you'd suffer over that? Or how about the ideology of the Nation of Islam or the Blank Panthers? Hardly ever hear a disparaging word about that. Why not condemn it all, EQUALLY? Racism is racism, is it not? Why are their levels of racism where one group gets a pass and the other doesn't?

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by kuresu, posted 01-19-2007 11:37 PM kuresu has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2007 1:32 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 81 of 130 (378358)
01-20-2007 12:26 PM
Reply to: Message 72 by randman
01-19-2007 11:45 PM


Re: Sowell's right
[qs]Racism is real, but the biggest problems in the black community are not dealing with racism from white folks, but they are problems such as black on black crime, elevation of negative cultural and social values, addictions, adultery and lack of commitment to one's spouse or loved ones, immorality and violence in general, advocating that becoming educated is a white thing, etc, etc,... These are moral, social and cultural problems that no one but black Americans themselves can solve
I particularly like the last part. (emphasis mine)
There have been lots of oppressed groups that rose above. It can be done, but it can't be done from the outside.
Exactly. And those that do try to repair from the inside, like Cosby or Sowell, are flamed for it.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by randman, posted 01-19-2007 11:45 PM randman has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 130 (378363)
01-20-2007 1:00 PM
Reply to: Message 77 by Lithodid-Man
01-20-2007 7:08 AM


Re: Tom Sowell
Finished the "Black Rednecks White Liberals" essay of the book, will attempt to stomach the rest tomorrow.
Wow, you flew through that!
Sorry, was not impressed.
I'm sorry to hear that. I was sure you would have at least commented on his writing ability if nothing else.
First it mainly relied on anectdote. Cite an 18th Century British writer on how Scots are shiftless and lazy. Cite a northern US scholar on how southerners are shiftless and lazy. Then cite anectdotes describing modern urban blacks as shiftless and lazy. So the same term was used therefore there is a connection?
Was that what you gathered from Du Bois and McWhiney-- that they were snobbishly looking down on them? I got a sense of insightful realism stemming solely from observation.
I am going to argue that a snobbish opinion on any race on any continent at any time is going to use similar terms. And more often than not Sowell's common terms will be part of it. Disregard for life, laziness, unwillingness to learn, quickness to insult, etc. All of it he uses can be found across social classes and cultures world-wide.
Sure, no society is immune to all social ills, however, can you say with a straight face that there was not a vast difference in attitude and behavior from those of London in the 1800's juxtaposed by that of the North Britons or those living in Ulster County, Ireland? Are you really going to tell me that there is no real difference between Beverly Hills and Watts? I'm not saying this in defense of Beverly Hills or to speak disparagingly about the residents of Watts, I'm merely elucidating the point that there is a very serious disparity. Statistics are not anecdotal, they are factual. So why would that be any different in this case? Is it because its taboo to bring up such things?
I am big on citations. And one thing I noticed is that Sowell relies heavily on them (nothing bad about that, we call it metanalysis in science) but a good number of his supposed hard numbers are his own publications. This is problematic. There is nothing wrong with citing yourself. But citing yourself from pubs where you (possibly?) cite others research is academically bad news. Cite yourself where you came up with original information, to cite yourself where you cite another statistic is at best academically sloppy and possibly indicative of fraud.
I saw very few of his own citations. In fact, I see none. I'm now parsing through the index to see any of his own citations. All I see is a sea of citations coming from various sources.
So, I see many of Sowell's points. I am not throwing out any babies with bathwater. No one can deny that African-Americans are in a bad situation overall in America. And I also believe that some black Americans are perpetuating this downfall by playing into white stereotypes. Upper middle class born gangster rappers certainly should look at themselves in shame for what they helped create. (Not to in any way release the guilt of major record label producers). And not to knock hip-hop or rap as well, merely those who chose to use it as a tool to perpetuate hate for bucks. (btw I am a huge Michael Franti fan, Beatnigs, Disposable Heroes of the HipHopcrisy, Spearhead).
I listen to very select Hip Hop that usually focuses on positive aspects, rather than "gats, hooptie's and bitches." Lets see, Blackalicious, De La Soul, Digable Planets A Tribe Called Quest, the Roots, etc. But when we start getting into NWA, Master P, Snoop Dogg, etc, I pretty much check out.
Well, I'm sorry to hear that you thought the book was so bad. But I commend you on making the effort to actually give it a fighting chance.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 77 by Lithodid-Man, posted 01-20-2007 7:08 AM Lithodid-Man has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 97 by Lithodid-Man, posted 01-21-2007 6:25 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 84 of 130 (378413)
01-20-2007 3:35 PM
Reply to: Message 83 by crashfrog
01-20-2007 1:32 PM


Re: Sowell's wrong
If you don't understand why it's racist to have the "White Panthers", or "White Entertainment Network", or "White History Month", or a "White Pride March", then you're either absolutely committed to not thinking about these issues very carefully, or you're such a hopeless racist that it's impossible for you to think about race in a socially just way.
Crash, was the fight for many years in this country the abolition of segregation? Yes, it was. What sense does it make to have "Black Entertainment Television?" Why not the Asian channel while we're at it, so that it excludes everyone but Asians. The fact that anyone would their station Black Entertainment is beyond stupid, and its completely racist. I can't believe you are even trying to defend it, its so transparent. But the same exact premise, "White Entertainment Television" would be shut down the nanosecond it came out. That's complete hypocrisy. But hey, why not just leave race out of the equation. Hey, there's a novel idea.
The privileged race
The privileged race? Yes, let me tell you how I'm living in the lap of luxury due to my special privileges. I'm going to knock on my neighbor's door, who is black, and rub in his face how my 790 square foot cottage is completely better than his 1,500 square foot home.
You couldn't possibly believe the nonsense that comes out of your mouth.
doesn't need a channel especially for their race - because every channel is especially for their race.
What? What? Every other channel is devoted to only one race? Source?
They don't need a month to celebrate their history - because their history is celebrated every month.
What? Wow... What can I even say to something so preposterously absurd? And where and what, ahem, do non-blacks celebrate every month over racial identity?
They don't need to march in pride of their race - because society gives them reasons to be proud at all times.
You know, I don't know if you're aware of this, but you can't help how you were born. Since we have no control over the way were born, there should be no pride in any race or sex, as if it were some sort of achievement.
Whites are "up." Blacks are "down."
I'll let Oprah, Bill Cosby, 50 Cent, Michael Jordan, Evander Holyfield, Condoleeza Rice, and the like know how bad they have it. Actually, because I'm living so phat, maybe I'll be a nice guy and offer them a leg up-- you know, because they are down and I'm up.
Trying to offset white privilege with the scantest of bones thrown to minorities isn't racism. I mean, for god's sake. Black people are less than half as likely to be called back for an interview as white people with identical qualifications, and your beef is that there's a TV channel called "BET"?
You know, its been my experience that many people get a job simply because their black, or any other minority.
What the fuck is wrong with you? If you don't want to watch BET, don't.
I don't watch BET, but that's probably because I have basic cable. I don't have a problem with BET, what I have a problem with is blatant hypocrisy.
The point is that there is real racism that represents real, unfair obstacles to the progress of black people - and then there's this shit in your post, which is nothing more than racist whining at the slightest erosion of white privilege.
From where I'm sitting, you're the only racist here with your unwaivering support of all black people, simply because they are black. That's racism Crash! You're just so obtuse and indoctrinated by your leftist ideals that you think you racism only extends to non-caucasians.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2007 1:32 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 85 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2007 5:32 PM Hyroglyphx has replied

  
Hyroglyphx
Inactive Member


Message 98 of 130 (378634)
01-21-2007 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 85 by crashfrog
01-20-2007 5:32 PM


Re: Sowell's wrong
What sense does it make to have "Fox News" now that Republicans lost Congress?
By the same premise, why didn't ABC, NBC, CBS, CNN, PBS, or any other major media outlet that appeals to a Leftist view call it quits after having lost both elections? Obviously, that's silly. Secondly, and more importantly, FOX news isn't named "Conservative television," one, because it isn't geared towards that demographic, and secondly, it isn't exclusive to anyone.
I guess maybe you think that the Family Guy and American Dad are really just NeoCon concoctions with how it constantly makes fun of Conservatism.
It's not like the government created BET, NJ, or Martin Luther King, Jr. The market supports BET (on cable, BTW) because it offers programming that appeals to its demographic in a way that meanstream, white-oriented programming doesn't.
First of all, I don't know what "white-oriented" television consists of. What exactly is that? Also, I realize that BET is geared towards a specific demographic. And that's fine. I have no problem with that. The problem that I have is that the name is rather exclusive. But more importantly is the blatant hypocrisy. Again, if anyone had White TV they'd be shut down in an instant. Why refer to a race at all?
You mean AZN? I watch that all the time.
I've never heard of it so I can't comment on it. What exactly is it?
quote:
But the same exact premise, "White Entertainment Television" would be shut down the nanosecond it came out.
Yes. Because it's racist
What are you talking about? How is that racist, but BET isn't? Please explain that, because thus far, you're just swishing the mouthwash to the other side of the cheek.
If you want to watch TV for whites, turn to any other channel. Fox News, especially.
How, pray tell, is FOX news especially for whites? That's the most absurd thing I've ever heard.
Yeah, the privileged race. You're privileged, for instance, by being part of what is considered the "normal" race. You're privileged by being twice as likely as an identically-qualified black guy to be called back for a job interview, for instance.
Crash, I am not privileged in any sense of the word. You are flying by the seat of your pants. I suppose this normal race fares well in Africa, the Mid East, and Asia too...?
How can it be nonsense? You've already admitted that it's true.
What did I admit was true?
Look, you've already said that black people face obstacles that others don't.
No I didn't. I said that I don't doubt that some of what you've said has happened. It would be foolish to think that it doesn't happen. You, however, are painting this picture of a massive conspiracy, apparently only directed towards blacks. You know, if I applied at a black owned company and my qualifications far exceeded their fellow African-Americans but they chose the other guy or gal over me simply because they'd feel more comfortable amongst their own, would that be racism?
You gave a lot of examples of how black people don't seem to do as well in America as they should.
Right, but you can't blame everyone but themselves in sweeping indictments Crash. Are you seriously going to tell me that none of it could be their own fault? I mean, this is on a case by case basis. Certainly not all employers are racist and certainly not all blacks are held down by the ghetto mentality. That's clearly evidenced by the fact that many blacks do just fine and work at very prestigious places of work in every sector of society. But you are making so that no matter any white man does, he can do no right, but every black man can do no wrong. Balance it out with reality. Of course racism is alive and well, but that doesn't mean that it extends to every case.
Well, look at the flip side of that. What does that say about you? That you don't face the same obstacles. That American society doesn't hold you back. What else should we call that besides privilege?
If I'm held back its for a good reason. If I excel its because I made it happen. That's not a privilege or a right. You have to earn that.
You can walk into any department store in the nation and find the stuff you need to take care of your hair. That's a privilege.
Huh? You lost me there. Take care of my hair?
quote:
Every other channel is devoted to only one race?
Yeah. The white race.
Wow... Crash, please come back to earth now.
Look. Turn on the TV and watch the programs. If you see a program that, to you, doesn't seem to have anything to do with race - that's a program made especially for white people. That's why you don't see the racial component - it's your race. It's transparent to you. Why wouldn't it be?
Give me an example of a transparently "white" show-- whatever the hell that is.
Think about it for a minute. List to yourself the stereotypes about white people. Now, think about where you first heard those, what the source of those stereotypes is. Minority comedians, almost certainly. Don't you find it odd that you can't think of a single white stereotype that a minority didn't come up with? Isn't it odd that all the stuff they say about white people - have to get drunk to dance well, get sleepy from turkey and wine, talk like they're from the suburbs - seem totally normal to you?
Crash, I'm beginning to think that you live a very sheltered life where everyone is like a cookie cutter person. First of all, not everyone needs alcohol to dance well any more than white people speak like Ned Flanders. But I do happen to find it humorous.
You're white. So, naturally, white-oriented stuff seems normal or raceless to you. That's how you know it's white-oriented!
I'm a mutt, for starters, secondly, are you white? If so, you seem to have a great understanding of how it all works.
And where and what, ahem, do non-blacks celebrate every month over racial identity?
Everywhere. Every history book has the history of white people. Every channel talks about the accomplishments of white people. Every magazine that isn't explicitly minority-oriented is about white people.
How many white people are on the cover of Time every month? How many minorities?
I'll let Oprah, Bill Cosby, 50 Cent, Michael Jordan, Evander Holyfield, Condoleeza Rice, and the like know how bad they have it.
Actually, every one of those people did have it bad, thanks to racism. That they overcame it to some degree is irrelevant. And, look at your examples. Bill Gates makes a lot more money than Opera. Condi still reports to George Bush.
So what? That's called Capitalism. Are you going to fault Bill Gates for being wealthier than Oprah? Secondly, Oprah is wealthier than 97% of not only the entire white, but the world population as well. Secondly, Barack Obama is probably going to be the next president of the United States. And how he "overcame" the gloomy dark cloud of white oppression is by not being a jackass. Seems to work pretty well.
I mean it's not even clear to me what you think you've proven with these examples.
quote:
You know, its been my experience that many people get a job simply because their black, or any other minority.
See, this is racism.
Yeah, no kidding. That's why I don't like Affirmative Action. Its government sanctioned racism.
You're a racist.
No, I'm not. But you are.
Your assumption is - whenever a minority gets a job over a white, it's "affirmative action", because there's no way a shiftless nigger could be more qualified than a white person.
No, I don't think that whenever a minority gets a job over a white that its affirmative action. I only think its affirmative action, when its affirmative action. Make sense?
But, of course, you get CBS, ABC, NBC, and all the rest of the broadcast channels - which are white-oriented programming.
Seriously, what is "white-oriented" television? That's a bunch of malarky.
(And, again, the way that you can detect this is for you, a white guy, to sit down and watch those channels and, if you can't detect a racial orientation to the programming - it's white-oriented, obviously.)
What? Crash, you're such a bigot and you don't even know it. Are you telling me that science-based programming is "white" in nature? Are you telling me that true-crime programs are "white" oriented? Are you telling me that the news is "white" oriented? Are you telling me that only Hip Hop and bling-bling qualifies as "black" in orientation?
I've offered no "unwaivering support" for anybody at all simply because of their race.
You have! You have made so that no matter what happens, whitey is always bad. You have made it so that in the event one black man is less qualified than someone else, racism just has to be the culprit. You've repeated this mantra over and over again.
But any idiot can take a look at a situation where employers choose white people over equally-qualified black ones and see - that's racist.
But only an agenda driven lemming would honestly believe that every single case is due to racism.
And the people who stand up for that racism system - like you - are racists.
Crash, I am offering EQUALITY and nothing more. You are trying to turn the tables and make blacks superior to whites. That's very evident at this point in our discussion. How is ACTUAL equality, something envisioned by the likes of Martin Luther King, worse than Malcolm X's vision of making blacks superior to every one else?
And you're sitting there blaming the victim because it's easier than discharging your responsibility
There is no victim, Crash, only the one's you've imagined in your mind. Never has racism been less of a problem in the United States than it is now. Never. The reality is that racism will always rear its ugly head no matter the civilization. However, steps have been taken to ameliorate it, and as a society were as definitely headed in the right direction. You are turning this in to an Us versus Them scenario that only adds an inflammatory element to the whole racial issue. I am in full support of equality. I question if you are.

"A man can no more diminish God's glory by refusing to worship Him than a lunatic can put out the sun by scribbling the word, 'darkness' on the walls of his cell." -C.S. Lewis

This message is a reply to:
 Message 85 by crashfrog, posted 01-20-2007 5:32 PM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Buzsaw, posted 01-21-2007 1:35 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 101 by crashfrog, posted 01-21-2007 2:15 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 106 by nator, posted 01-21-2007 5:52 PM Hyroglyphx has not replied
 Message 119 by kuresu, posted 01-22-2007 12:00 AM Hyroglyphx has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024