Here is how NYC wants to kick it off :
NY City Council Considers Halt to N-Word
By SARA KUGLER, Associated Press Writer
2 hours ago
NEW YORK - The city council is considering a symbolic resolution calling for New Yorkers to stop using the n-word, and supporters say Black History Month is a relevant time to call attention to the racial slur.
Queens Councilman Leroy Comrie spearheaded the nonbinding measure before the New York City Council Thursday. He appeared with hip-hop pioneer Kurtis Blow Walker on Thursday and said the slur has gained a level of acceptance among entertainers and youths that is troubling.
"So I challenge the hip-hop community, I challenge you to abolish that word during the month of February _ Black History Month _ and beyond," Walker said.
For centuries, the slur has been used to humiliate and degrade blacks, but more recently it also has become a term of endearment and camaraderie among some.
Hip-hop culture in particular has been singled out for its use of the word in music and entertainment, which some say is helping convince an entire generation that the word is acceptable.
National attention increased after an incident last year involving actor Michael Richards, who played the Kramer character on "Seinfeld." Richards blew up at black patrons in a comedy club with a profane tirade that included the slur.
After the Richards episode, black leaders challenged the public and the entertainment industry _ including rap artists, actors and movie studios _ to stop using the insult.
The resolution is expected to go to a vote by the end of February.
Comrie said he and the Abolish the N Word organization also will organize an essay contest for February, asking schoolchildren to write pieces on the topic.
Dennis Walcott, Mayor Michael Bloomberg's deputy mayor for education, pledged his support for the movement.
Here is a list of black American inventors - this is a fantastic site:
http://inventors.about.com/od/blackinventors/a/Black_History.htm
a month of Wednesdays?
Will this week never end?
Student Angry Over Lack of Black History Classes Stabs 3A 25-year-old student angry that his technical school wasn't teaching about black history walked into his business class Friday and stabbed three school officials with a screwdriver, police said.
Kevin Mair of Plantation walked into his classroom at Atlantic Technical Center using a cane and sound-blocking headphones similar to those used in a gun range, said Officer Anthony Avello of the Coconut Creek Police Department.
Mair became agitated and "expressed his displeasure about the lack of black history being taught at the school," Avello said. February is Black History Month.
Mair then attacked the three victims with a screwdriver he took to school, officials said. An assistant director of the school was stabbed in the back and two security specialists in the arms. The three were later released from the hospital.
Mair fled in his car, was involved in a car crash and tried to run from officers but was apprehended.
He will be charged with multiple counts of aggravated battery, authorities said.
Quote:
the G-man said:
Student Angry Over Lack of Black History Classes Stabs 3
A 25-year-old student angry that his technical school wasn't teaching about black history walked into his business class Friday and stabbed three school officials with a screwdriver, police said.
Kevin Mair of Plantation walked into his classroom at Atlantic Technical Center using a cane and sound-blocking headphones similar to those used in a gun range, said Officer Anthony Avello of the Coconut Creek Police Department.
Mair became agitated and "expressed his displeasure about the lack of black history being taught at the school," Avello said. February is Black History Month.
Mair then attacked the three victims with a screwdriver he took to school, officials said. An assistant director of the school was stabbed in the back and two security specialists in the arms. The three were later released from the hospital.
Mair fled in his car, was involved in a car crash and tried to run from officers but was apprehended.
He will be charged with multiple counts of aggravated battery, authorities said.
That is not the proper way to celebrate Black History Month. 
That school is very close to where I live. Very close meaning I could get in my car and get there between the time it takes to post this and the time it will likely take any of you to actually read it. I live in the same county.
It's not a good school. It's not a very difficult school to get into. You don't even need a high school diploma, I believe.
I'm not saying this is to be expected. I am saying, though, that it's not a surprise. Killings happen all the time here. It's South Florida, not Bum-Fuck, Ohio. And posting this is akin to me posting an article about some U.S. soldier in Iraq who went nutso because he found out his girl was cheating on him back home and did that postal thing with his government issued rifle. There isn't a deep and profound universal message to be found here, just a sad and unfortunate story. Not to say there was an intended meaning. No idea. But if there was one, well, reread this paragraph.
Wednesday E. Perkins for U.S. Senator!
Quote:
the G-man said:
Student Angry Over Lack of Black History Classes Stabs 3
And one wonders why no one outside the community gives a shit about the month.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
There isn't a deep and profound universal message to be found here, just a sad and unfortunate story.
The only 'universal' message I would see here is that its always fucked up whenever someone uses any holiday as an excuse to kill or attack someone.
Black History Month isn't a holiday, Morning Glory.
Quote:
klinton said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Student Angry Over Lack of Black History Classes Stabs 3
And one wonders why no one outside the community gives a shit about the month.
And by "the community" I'm guessing you mean the black community, and by "one" I guess you mean...ummm, I really don't know who you mean by that.
Yeah, well, people outside the community really do care. Maybe not you and your close group of friends--to which I say "Meh"--but others do, black, white, yellow, green, and polka dot-on-the-forehead. I know this because it wouldn't still be a month you'd actually hear about every once a year otherwise. The black community alone wouldn't be enough support. It's true. Do you even know when Asian Pacific American Heritage Month is?
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Black History Month isn't a holiday, Morning Glory.
Geez, someone's got that not so fresh feeling today.
Because I said it wasn't a holiday or because I called you Morning Glory?
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
klinton said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Student Angry Over Lack of Black History Classes Stabs 3
And one wonders why no one outside the community gives a shit about the month.
And by "the community" I'm guessing you mean the black community, and by "one" I guess you mean...ummm, I really don't know who you mean by that.
Yeah, well, people outside the community really do care. Maybe not you and your close group of friends--to which I say "Meh"--but others do, black, white, yellow, green, and polka dot-on-the-forehead. I know this because it wouldn't still be a month you'd actually hear about every once a year otherwise. The black community alone wouldn't be enough support. It's true. Do you even know when Asian Pacific American Heritage Month is?
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
As I've said across several topics now (contrary to the "white racist" stereotype the liberal media likes to project) it is in fact blacks who commit the majority of racial violence against whites, at a ratio of about 50 incidents to 1.
Something motivates this violence by blacks against other racial groups. And I beleive it's the sense of entitlement, of something owed to blacks. An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence.
And of liberal rationalization, not only within the black community, but also by non-black liberal politicians pandering to the black community, that rationalize such incidents as understandable backlash to "generations of racism" or whatever.
I say it again: every racial group on Earth has been discriminated against by every other group who could do so. Blacks are not unique in their suffering !
Should I sue the Italians for their Roman ancestors invading and seizing property of my ancestors?
The Huns?
The Vandals? The Visigoths?
The French?
The Scandinavians?
The Mongols?
How much is enough?
I'm proud of the fact that the United States has come so far with civil rights. And I regard the attitude that clings to the past, and pretends it's still 1965, as spoiled, arrogant, and a breeding ground for precisely the kind of violence this article cites.
I can discuss similar incidents, that are just as close to my home. This attitude in the black community has to end, so the nation can move on, and blacks can enjoy the freedom that truly exists now.
As I've said previously, while there are many incidents of black violence against other racial groups, there are many more blacks who feel that indoctrinated anger, but would not take that anger to the level of violence. But the indoctinated angry message is there just the same, and that is the true cause of alienation between blacks and the rest of America.
And I have to wonder based on that: Are Martin Luther King Day and Black History Month true celebrations of freedom?
Or are they, in truth, part of the divisive "hate whitey" culture of rage?
Of course you wonder that. You don't have a clue.
You know, that's actually the nicer, censored version of that post.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
Really? Can you back prove that statement or are you just letting your racism show?
There's a Martin Luther King Jr. boulevard here. Its in a great neighborhood with plenty of upscale stores on it with virtually no crime.
People like you just need to shut the hell up and start accepting people that aren't like you.
You're talking to a brick wall, rex. It won't do any good.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
That school is very close to where I live. Very close meaning I could get in my car and get there between the time it takes to post this and the time it will likely take any of you to actually read it. I live in the same county.
It's not a good school. It's not a very difficult school to get into. You don't even need a high school diploma, I believe.
I'm not saying this is to be expected. I am saying, though, that it's not a surprise. Killings happen all the time here. It's South Florida, not Bum-Fuck, Ohio. And posting this is akin to me posting an article about some U.S. soldier in Iraq who went nutso because he found out his girl was cheating on him back home and did that postal thing with his government issued rifle. There isn't a deep and profound universal message to be found here, just a sad and unfortunate story. Not to say there was an intended meaning. No idea. But if there was one, well, reread this paragraph.
I don't know we get a lot of murders in the Cincinnati area. Too many actually.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
it's not a statement of any significance. Do you have any statistical evidence? Do you have racial breakdowns of the neighborhoods? Do you have (more important than race in determining crime rates) economic breakdowns of the neighborhoods?
Or is this just some generalization like "all black people are lazy and that's why they have stupid hair"?
Quote:
As I've said across several topics now (contrary to the "white racist" stereotype the liberal media likes to project) it is in fact blacks who commit the majority of racial violence against whites, at a ratio of about 50 incidents to 1.
Wow. Somehow you've managed to blame racism on the "liberal media" and turn black people into bad guys.
Black on black crime is more common than black on white crime.
And white people have more of a history of racism. Lynchings, slavery, racial stereotypes. Black people who are prejudice generally feel that way due to a feeling of oppression. And the fact is, its only been in the last 40 years that they even had civil rights laws on the books. It takes time and generations for the painful memories to fade away.
Michael Richards, the Simpson trial, Rodney King, Watts Riots, FBI spying on King and the Black Panthers. This is all within the last 50 years.
Please stop trying to play the white middle class victim card.
Quote:
Something motivates this violence by blacks against other racial groups. And I beleive it's the sense of entitlement, of something owed to blacks. An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence.
or perhaps there is a certain sense of frustration in lower income neighborhoods. Your comments don't really seek to address the problems, you're just trying to imply blacks are bad in a roundabout way.
Quote:
And of liberal rationalization, not only within the black community, but also by non-black liberal politicians pandering to the black community, that rationalize such incidents as understandable backlash to "generations of racism" or whatever.
Again blaming the liberals?
As I pointed out above, there is a constant stream of racism, a separation between white and black in the culture that only encourages hostility and emboldens racists like yourself. Thankfully, things do improve. Just in my lifetime I have seen serious improvement in the racial relations. I guess I live in hope since I can't fall back on the dream of a white's only heaven.
Quote:
I say it again: every racial group on Earth has been discriminated against by every other group who could do so. Blacks are not unique in their suffering !
true, but there's a flaw in your logic. (see below)
Quote:
Should I sue the Italians for their Roman ancestors invading and seizing property of my ancestors?
The Huns?
The Vandals? The Visigoths?
The French?
The Scandinavians?
The Mongols?
Here's the logic flaw:
The Roman Empire no longer exists, the Egytpian Empire is gone, and pretty much all of the others are too.
The Germans had to make it up to the French and the Jews for their recent bits of evil.
Slavery involving Africans did not happen with some now-defunct government. It was the United States of America in what is still the United States of America.
Now I don't think anyone is talking seriously about reparations between descendents (that seems silly), but there is a need for fence bending. And, unfortunately, the KKK and folks like yourself have basically agrivated the matter since the Civil War ended. Civil Rights was the first real stepping stone, and race relations have improved, racism has declined to the point that its considered abhorent and America in general is a better place because of it.
Black History month is about intergration, about mainstreaming blacks by acknowledging that they have been part of history as artists and inventors and overall pioneers. It brings more of a sense of their true place alongside whites in history. I think it's a great thing for children to learn that black people were more than just slaves, and it gives black youths a sense that they can actually accomplish something other than being a stereotype for people like yourself to look down on.
Quote:
How much is enough?
yes, how much is enough? how much whining do we have to hear from people like you about not always being the center of attention. March-December is White History Months, is that enough? You have a Christian President who wages holy wars to kill infidels in the middle east but you whine because two gay people want to marry and that somehow threatens your marriage.
How much is enough?
Quote:
I'm proud of the fact that the United States has come so far with civil rights. And I regard the attitude that clings to the past, and pretends it's still 1965, as spoiled, arrogant, and a breeding ground for precisely the kind of violence this article cites.
You want to hold up a crazy person as representative of their entire race? There are way crazier white people. And I would personally not want to go down this standard as Charles Manson's race war belief would be impossible to defend (he was white and hated blacks so by your standards all whites hate blacks).
Quote:
I can discuss similar incidents, that are just as close to my home. This attitude in the black community has to end, so the nation can move on, and blacks can enjoy the freedom that truly exists now.
One guy, who was crazy, got violent. it happens, every day, across all race lines.
Quote:
As I've said previously, while there are many incidents of black violence against other racial groups, there are many more blacks who feel that indoctrinated anger, but would not take that anger to the level of violence. But the indoctinated angry message is there just the same, and that is the true cause of alienation between blacks and the rest of America.
there are many messages. Bill Cosby advocates blakc kids to get off their asses and go to college. Many many many messages. Just the same as how there are whites who advocate racial purity.
Quote:
And I have to wonder based on that: Are Martin Luther King Day and Black History Month true celebrations of freedom?
Or are they, in truth, part of the divisive "hate whitey" culture of rage?
maybe you're just an asshole and the black people you've known have been responding to that.
I live in a black neighborhood, and a pretty shitty one at that. I get along fine and have never had a problem because I don't approach them like they're lesser than me.
Give that a try some time.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
You're talking to a brick wall, rex. It won't do any good.
I know, I just had to vent. I don't expect something like facts to make wonder tard change his views.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Of course you wonder that. You don't have a clue.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
You know, that's actually the nicer, censored version of that post.
You know, Jason, I don't doubt that you have another perspective on the issue, and I actually looked forward to seeing your counter-perspective to my views, explaining why you think I'm wrong, from your perspective.
What a disappointment that you chose to respond with a flip remark that does nothing to clarify why you disagree with me, or prove in any way that I might be wrong. We don't agree politically, but I have grown to appreciate your perspective, when you choose to fully explain it.
You're certainly capable of a better response.
"Yeah, that Jason Perkins... he's articulate, bright... clean..."
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
I live in a black neighborhood, and a pretty shitty one at that. I get along fine and have never had a problem because I don't approach them like they're lesser than me.
Give that a try some time.
I grew up in what's considered one of the rougher neighborhoods in Cleveland on a demographic basis. And yeah, our house got broken into four times, and yeah, my father had a gun in his face twice. But you know what? Of the many people in that neighborhood we knew, there were good people there. Honest, caring people. People just like us. (Actually there weren't even that many differences in appearance, considering the multiethnic nature of my family.) And even if the people there didn't all look like me and speak the same primary language as me (not a problem for me anyway), they were all just as human as me. Yeah, there are bad apples, but you'll find those wherever you go. There are reasons for a higher concentration of them, but the genetic background of the people there is most definitely not one of them. So I'm afraid I would have to side with adler over DtWB on this one.
Damn you, adler. I've had to agree with you for the third time today.
Quote:
rex said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
Really? Can you back prove that statement or are you just letting your racism show?
There's a Martin Luther King Jr. boulevard here. Its in a great neighborhood with plenty of upscale stores on it with virtually no crime.
People like you just need to shut the hell up and start accepting people that aren't like you.
And then there's rex on the other hand...
There's no illusion of anything resembling a civil discussion where you're concerned. I think if Sammitch or PJP or WBAM had voiced the same views, you wouldn't have jumped at this post like a bulldog on a short leash. But because you saw it was posted by Wonder Boy, you just jumped into attack mode, like you consistently do to my posts in recent weeks.
I don't need to defend against your allegation that I'm racist. I've said many times, across many topics, that I strongly support civil rights and the acheivement of true equality in this country since 1965 for blacks and other minorities.
And I've said that racism to some degree still exists and will probably never be fully eliminated.
And that includes racism of other minorities against whites, that still exists as well.
I don't have a prejudice or racist attitude toward blacks, as you allege.
But I do have a problem with the widely proselytized and prevalent attitude among a large percentage of American blacks (whether that percentage is 20% or 50% or 70% is difficult to guage), that perpetuates the idea that blacks are as discriminated against now as they were in 1965.
There are a large number of blacks in every conceivable profession, there are no longer any race barriers, there are black CEO's of companies, black attorneys, a former black chairman of the DNC (Ron Brown), black Supreme Court Justices, presidential cabinet members, and several black contenders for President, one of whom (Colin Powell) polls have said since 1992 in every election cycle would be the choice of a majority of americans over any other candidate offered.
"People like [me]" support black America, and want leaders who reject the vicious and divisive rhetoric that prevents black america from fully participating in mainstream America.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Yeah, there are bad apples, but you'll find those wherever you go. There are reasons for a higher concentration of them, but the genetic background of the people there is most definitely not one of them. So I'm afraid I would have to side with adler over DtWB on this one.
You side with the perception, not the reality, Sammitch.
That's not what I said. At all.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
"People like [me]" support black America, and want leaders who reject the vicious and divisive rhetoric that prevents black america from fully participating in mainstream America.
I think that's true on some level for you. It's just that sometimes you will say things that come across as incompatible with that statement. And so it's kind of hard to reconcile everything together. But everyone has a particular perspective on it. I actually agree with you to some extent that too many black Americans can't or won't truly speak for themselves. That's the real problem. Many of the people who are claiming to speak for them are simply Guilty White Liberals™ who maybe at some point did honestly want what was best for the black community but have bought into an agenda that uses minorities as political cannon fodder in exchange for marginal improvements in their quality of life.
Late edit!
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Yeah, there are bad apples, but you'll find those wherever you go. There are reasons for a higher concentration of them, but the genetic background of the people there is most definitely not one of them. So I'm afraid I would have to side with adler over DtWB on this one.
You side with the perception, not the reality, Sammitch.
That's not what I said. At all.
As I said at the beginning of this post, at times it felt like that's how you were coming across. It's a very touchy subject, and there's really not much room for ambiguity.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
You know, Jason, I don't doubt that you have another perspective on the issue, and I actually looked forward to seeing your counter-perspective to my views, explaining why you think I'm wrong, from your perspective.
I don't need to. Although he chose to word it in a different manner than I would have, Karl made some very good points that covered much of the same ground any post from me would have.
Plus, I fear you're too far gone. You're too entrenched in sound bites and ignorance for me to reach you. I don't have the time or the patience to spend hours educating you on the counter-perspective. You don't even know the facts. Start there then maybe we'll talk. Or maybe I'll get bored. Until then, a flip remark is all you get.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
it's not a statement of any significance. Do you have any statistical evidence? Do you have racial breakdowns of the neighborhoods? Do you have (more important than race in determining crime rates) economic breakdowns of the neighborhoods?
Or is this just some generalization
I don't know if WB is correct, but the generalization of which he speaks is not an uncommon belief, or even one held exclusively by white people. As the St. Petersburg Times noted:
most everyone agrees that the image of King Street, U.S.A., is largely of a destitute, crime-ridden area. It's a stigma comedian Chris Rock uses in his standup routine.
It goes like this: Rock says a white friend called him for directions. The man said he was calling from King Street.
"Run!" Rock tells him.
"I don't care where you live in America," Rock says, "if you're on Martin Luther King Boulevard, there's some violence going on."
That perception of the nation's 680 King streets too often matches reality, says Jerry Kolo, a professor at Florida Atlantic University. Once intended as a symbol of equality, the roads have become the dividing line between black and white America.
Goodness I'm mean. Maybe I will respond. Later.
In the meantime, here are some interesting points that have been made but skipped:
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
it's not a statement of any significance. Do you have any statistical evidence? Do you have racial breakdowns of the neighborhoods? Do you have (more important than race in determining crime rates) economic breakdowns of the neighborhoods?
Or is this just some generalization like "all black people are lazy and that's why they have stupid hair"?
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Something motivates this violence by blacks against other racial groups. And I beleive it's the sense of entitlement, of something owed to blacks. An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence.
or perhaps there is a certain sense of frustration in lower income neighborhoods. Your comments don't really seek to address the problems, you're just trying to imply blacks are bad in a roundabout way.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Should I sue the Italians for their Roman ancestors invading and seizing property of my ancestors?
The Huns?
The Vandals? The Visigoths?
The French?
The Scandinavians?
The Mongols?
Here's the logic flaw:
The Roman Empire no longer exists, the Egytpian Empire is gone, and pretty much all of the others are too.
The Germans had to make it up to the French and the Jews for their recent bits of evil.
Slavery involving Africans did not happen with some now-defunct government. It was the United States of America in what is still the United States of America.
Now I don't think anyone is talking seriously about reparations between descendents (that seems silly), but there is a need for fence bending. And, unfortunately, the KKK and folks like yourself have basically agrivated the matter since the Civil War ended. Civil Rights was the first real stepping stone, and race relations have improved, racism has declined to the point that its considered abhorent and America in general is a better place because of it.
Black History month is about intergration, about mainstreaming blacks by acknowledging that they have been part of history as artists and inventors and overall pioneers. It brings more of a sense of their true place alongside whites in history. I think it's a great thing for children to learn that black people were more than just slaves, and it gives black youths a sense that they can actually accomplish something other than being a stereotype for people like yourself to look down on.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
I'm proud of the fact that the United States has come so far with civil rights. And I regard the attitude that clings to the past, and pretends it's still 1965, as spoiled, arrogant, and a breeding ground for precisely the kind of violence this article cites.
You want to hold up a crazy person as representative of their entire race? There are way crazier white people. And I would personally not want to go down this standard as Charles Manson's race war belief would be impossible to defend (he was white and hated blacks so by your standards all whites hate blacks).
Quote:
I can discuss similar incidents, that are just as close to my home. This attitude in the black community has to end, so the nation can move on, and blacks can enjoy the freedom that truly exists now.
One guy, who was crazy, got violent. it happens, every day, across all race lines.
Quote:
rex said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
Really? Can you back prove that statement or are you just letting your racism show?
There's a Martin Luther King Jr. boulevard here. Its in a great neighborhood with plenty of upscale stores on it with virtually no crime.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
it's not a statement of any significance. Do you have any statistical evidence? Do you have racial breakdowns of the neighborhoods? Do you have (more important than race in determining crime rates) economic breakdowns of the neighborhoods?
Or is this just some generalization like "all black people are lazy and that's why they have stupid hair"?
I doubt anyone in this country has visited every last Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard in America. But I've seen 20 or 30 of them, and they haven't stood out for me as symbols of peace, prosperity, unity or tolerance.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Or is this just some generalization like "all black people are lazy and that's why they have stupid hair"?
And I'd appreciate it if you wouln't "script" me, and put racist comments that are not mine in my mouth.
Clearly, they've already confused Sammitch, for one, to believe opinions not mine to be representative of me.
You lose any potential moral high ground with such smear tactics.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said across several topics now (contrary to the "white racist" stereotype the liberal media likes to project) it is in fact blacks who commit the majority of racial violence against whites, at a ratio of about 50 incidents to 1.
Wow. Somehow you've managed to blame racism on the "liberal media" and turn black people into bad guys.
Black on black crime is more common than black on white crime.
I've already quoted statistics to support my views on this in another recent topic.
Black-on-black crime is higher statistically than black-on-white crime, yes.
But black-on-white hate-based crime is statistically far higher than white-on-black racially motivated hate-crime, at a ratio of about 50 incidents to 1.
The question is not total crimes. The question is about whether whites are more violently racist.
I stand by my numbers.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
And white people have more of a history of racism. Lynchings, slavery, racial stereotypes. Black people who are prejudice generally feel that way due to a feeling of oppression. And the fact is, its only been in the last 40 years that they even had civil rights laws on the books. It takes time and generations for the painful memories to fade away.
Michael Richards, the Simpson trial, Rodney King, Watts Riots, FBI spying on King and the Black Panthers. This is all within the last 50 years.
Please stop trying to play the white middle class victim card.
It's been demonstrated many times that the liberal media hypes the isolated case where white criminals attack a black, gay or other individual of a minority, to falsely perpetuate the notion of vast and out of contol "violent white racist" problem that minorities need to live in fear of.
When again, statistics show the reverse to be true. That whites, more often, are the victims and not the perpetrators.
Dredging up lynchings and slavery from 150 years ago is about as relevant as the Pellopenesian War, or the fall of Rome to the Vandals and the Visigoths. It does not reflect current trends.
Even the 1965 killing of 3 civil rights workers in Mississippi (2 white, 1 black) by the KKK was a very isolated occurrence, and even so, the potential for similar incidents was completely gutted away by the FBI.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Something motivates this violence by blacks against other racial groups. And I beleive it's the sense of entitlement, of something owed to blacks. An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence.
or perhaps there is a certain sense of frustration in lower income neighborhoods. Your comments don't really seek to address the problems, you're just trying to imply blacks are bad in a roundabout way.
No, I'm not "implying" anthing, I'm saying flatout: Blacks are committing these violent acts (i.e., stabbing 3 faculty members in a school, because the school didn't do enough to celebrate black history month, and similar incidents that not all but a 50-to-1 ratio of black Americans feel justified in unleashing on whites, clearly racially motivated hate-crimes), and it is this victim/backlash liberal rhetoric that the blacks committing these crimes feel gives them license to do these crimes.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And of liberal rationalization, not only within the black community, but also by non-black liberal politicians pandering to the black community, that rationalize such incidents as understandable backlash to "generations of racism" or whatever.
Again blaming the liberals?
As I pointed out above, there is a constant stream of racism, a separation between white and black in the culture that only encourages hostility and emboldens racists like yourself. Thankfully, things do improve. Just in my lifetime I have seen serious improvement in the racial relations. I guess I live in hope since I can't fall back on the dream of a white's only heaven.
Again, your words in that last phrase, put in my mouth. And falsely representing both my actual words, and my beleifs and dreams as well.
I've dated women of just about every race and ethnicity, to fit into your stereotype of someone who dreams of a white racist heaven.
Of the two women I almost married, one was from Spain, and the other was from the Phillipines.
And I dated a 42-year-old Jamaican lady for about a year and a half about 9 years ago. Astonishingly, she voiced to me that she doesn't date American black men because of their attitude and lack of ambition (her exact words). She also expressed relief that her 21-year old daughter (a retail store manager) had similarly steered clear of American black men. Since she isn't white, how will you label her, I wonder?
I don't share her view of "all American blacks", but I'm sympathetic to the notion that such an attitude has infected a considerable percentage of black Americans.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I say it again: every racial group on Earth has been discriminated against by every other group who could do so. Blacks are not unique in their suffering !
true, but there's a flaw in your logic. (see below)
Quote:
Should I sue the Italians for their Roman ancestors invading and seizing property of my ancestors?
The Huns?
The Vandals? The Visigoths?
The French?
The Scandinavians?
The Mongols?
Here's the logic flaw:
The Roman Empire no longer exists, the Egytpian Empire is gone, and pretty much all of the others are too.
The Germans had to make it up to the French and the Jews for their recent bits of evil.
Slavery involving Africans did not happen with some now-defunct government. It was the United States of America in what is still the United States of America.
Now I don't think anyone is talking seriously about reparations between descendents (that seems silly), but there is a need for fence bending. And, unfortunately, the KKK and folks like yourself have basically agrivated the matter since the Civil War ended. Civil Rights was the first real stepping stone, and race relations have improved, racism has declined to the point that its considered abhorent and America in general is a better place because of it.
Black History month is about intergration, about mainstreaming blacks by acknowledging that they have been part of history as artists and inventors and overall pioneers. It brings more of a sense of their true place alongside whites in history. I think it's a great thing for children to learn that black people were more than just slaves, and it gives black youths a sense that they can actually accomplish something other than being a stereotype for people like yourself to look down on.
The Roman people still exists in the remaining state of Italy.
Egypt still exists and prides itself in its ancient culture.
Many feel that Germany did not pay nearly enough for its aggression and genocide in World War II. One example is the gold in Swiss bank accounts, melted into gold bars from the fillings of Jews' gold teeth, among other gold possessions.
My point is: Similarly, the U.S. govenment today is not that of the same era as Washington, Jefferson, Jackson, Grant, McKinley or Eisenhower. It is a government as vastly different as any of these reformed states of former empires. It is a vastly different world, and beyond perhaps the surviving grandchildren's generation, there has to be a statute of limitations, so we are not eternally reliving past tragedies as if they are still occurring.
And as long as they are artificially kept alive, they are still occurring. Preventing society from moving forward and unifying.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
How much is enough?
yes, how much is enough? how much whining do we have to hear from people like you about not always being the center of attention. March-December is White History Months, is that enough? You have a Christian President who wages holy wars to kill infidels in the middle east but you whine because two gay people want to marry and that somehow threatens your marriage.
How much is enough?
Oh God, the "people like you" excrement.
You don't even warrant a response on this one. There is nothing even vaguely resembling my opinion in what you've scripted me to have said and believe.
Complete smear on your part.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I'm proud of the fact that the United States has come so far with civil rights. And I regard the attitude that clings to the past, and pretends it's still 1965, as spoiled, arrogant, and a breeding ground for precisely the kind of violence this article cites.
You want to hold up a crazy person as representative of their entire race? There are way crazier white people. And I would personally not want to go down this standard as Charles Manson's race war belief would be impossible to defend (he was white and hated blacks so by your standards all whites hate blacks).
No, I hold up a crazy person as an example of the poisonous effect of the victim/justified retribution liberal rhetoric that has infected a considerable percentage of the American black community, in divisive attitude, if not also violent action.
I don't deny that white racist whackos exist as well, and I'm equally critical of the KKK amd other white supremacist organizations. Except that the liberal media is sympathetic to, and helps proselytize the victim/justified retribution black mindset, even as they condemn the white equivalent.
I've condemned white racism, that hasn't stopped you yet from scripting me to be a white racist.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said previously, while there are many incidents of black violence against other racial groups, there are many more blacks who feel that indoctrinated anger, but would not take that anger to the level of violence. But the indoctinated angry message is there just the same, and that is the true cause of alienation between blacks and the rest of America.
there are many messages. Bill Cosby advocates black kids to get off their asses and go to college. Many many many messages. Just the same as how there are whites who advocate racial purity.
Unfortunately, Cosby's message of personal responsibility is not the prevalent message in black america. Unfortunately.
And Cosby and other blacks who push for this personal responsibility and reject the victim-rhetoric, are frequently regarded as traitors to the black community, by those blacks who seek to perpetuate black america's self-alienating attitude indefinitely.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And I have to wonder based on that: Are Martin Luther King Day and Black History Month true celebrations of freedom?
Or are they, in truth, part of the divisive "hate whitey" culture of rage?
maybe you're just an asshole and the black people you've known have been responding to that.
I live in a black neighborhood, and a pretty shitty one at that. I get along fine and have never had a problem because I don't approach them like they're lesser than me.
Give that a try some time.
And maybe I'm right.
And because I'm right, the only way you can create anything resembling a winning counterpoint is to script me to say things I never actually said, and misrepresent me in a vicious, deceitful way.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
...
"Yeah, that Jason Perkins... he's articulate, bright... clean..."
That really is a cheap shot. Biden has a solid record on cival rights. If you want to play the political game of using a bad soundbite to trash somebodies reputation, your really the one who needs to be judged as coming up short.
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Biden is a democrat, so he gets a pass from me.
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
...
"Yeah, that Jason Perkins... he's articulate, bright... clean..."
That really is a cheap shot. Biden has a solid record on cival rights. If you want to play the political game of using a bad soundbite to trash somebodies reputation, your really the one who needs to be judged as coming up short.
Also he undermined his whole "white racism is a liberal lie" by saying a white guy was being racist.
And Biden has explained the word clean was a poor choice, and that Obama had no ill will toward him.
I think a better representation of a whit politician being racist is that guy who said macaca. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in South Africa as a kid and macaca is a racist term for minorities there.
But he's a republican so....
Quote:
Karl Hungus could have said:
I think a better representation of a white politician being racist is that guy who said "nigger" on a talk show a few years ago. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in as a grand wizard in the KKK.
But he's a democrat so its cool with me
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
"Yeah, that Jason Perkins... he's articulate, bright... clean..."
That really is a cheap shot. Biden has a solid record on cival rights. If you want to play the political game of using a bad soundbite to trash somebodies reputation, your really the one who needs to be judged as coming up short.
That was playful use of a remark by Biden that was not meant as an attack on him, or Wednesday either for that matter.
As I've said many times, I like Biden, and certainly don't think negatively of Biden for the remark I quoted. I think he's a straight-shooter, who is candid about his views, and offers real alternatives and not just liberal whining. His suggested plan to divide Iraq into three separate Kurd, Shi'ite and Sunni states, may be the best alternative, if the current so-called surge fails. But I hope it doesn't come to that.
I often respect your views too, M E M, whether or not I agree with them. But I think you jumped the gun on this one.
For that matter, what did Biden really say that was offensive? It was a bit funny and awkward the way Biden phrased it, but ultimately all he said about Obama is that he's bright, articulate and [I think he meant to say] clean-cut. There's nothing racist or insulting about that.
Again, Democrat or Republican, these guys are walking by cameras 12 or 14 hours a day, and sometimes they're just tired and the words don't come out right. I guarantee there's similar quotes from all candidates on either side, if the liberal or conservative media chooses to exploit them.
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Karl Hungus could have said:
I think a better representation of a white politician being racist is that guy who said "nigger" on a talk show a few years ago. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in as a grand wizard in the KKK.
But he's a democrat so its cool with me
Robert Byrd, wikipedia listing
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
You know, Jason, I don't doubt that you have another perspective on the issue, and I actually looked forward to seeing your counter-perspective to my views, explaining why you think I'm wrong, from your perspective.
I don't need to. Although he chose to word it in a different manner than I would have, Karl made some very good points that covered much of the same ground any post from me would have.
Plus, I fear you're too far gone. You're too entrenched in sound bites and ignorance for me to reach you. I don't have the time or the patience to spend hours educating you on the counter-perspective. You don't even know the facts. Start there then maybe we'll talk. Or maybe I'll get bored. Until then, a flip remark is all you get.
You know, that's funny.
I only get my racial perception from "soundbytes and ignorance" ?
Gee, that's funny, because I could have sworn I quoted sections from several books I read on the subject, and didn't just draw my opinion from soundbytes. Any soundbytes, actually. Show me where I quoted soundbytes.
And while you voice pretty near the maximum dismissive contempt for my conservative opinion, I've done my best to listen to what you have to say, remain respectful of your alternative prespective, and not be dismissive of your views as "entrenched" or "too far gone".
What makes you so damned sure you've got an inside track to "the facts"? I could be equally dismissive of you as being "deeply entrenced" in liberal propaganda, if I so chose to.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
I think a better representation of a whit politician being racist is that guy who said macaca. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in South Africa as a kid and macaca is a racist term for minorities there.
But he's a republican so....
George Allen, wikipedia listing
Allen explains his comment, and video of the incident
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Biden is a democrat, so he gets a pass from me.
That is just so appropiate that you alter quotes like so.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
There's no illusion of anything resembling a civil discussion where you're concerned. I think if Sammitch or PJP or WBAM had voiced the same views, you wouldn't have jumped at this post like a bulldog on a short leash. But because you saw it was posted by Wonder Boy, you just jumped into attack mode, like you consistently do to my posts in recent weeks.
So instead of defending your position or...I don't know, being a man and admitting you're wrong you choose to victimize yourself. Your kind are so predictable.
Quote:
rex said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
There's no illusion of anything resembling a civil discussion where you're concerned. I think if Sammitch or PJP or WBAM had voiced the same views, you wouldn't have jumped at this post like a bulldog on a short leash. But because you saw it was posted by Wonder Boy, you just jumped into attack mode, like you consistently do to my posts in recent weeks.
So instead of defending your position or...I don't know, being a man and admitting you're wrong you choose to victimize yourself. Your kind are so predictable.
Uh... I've defended my position at considerable length across several posts.
And what have you contributed to this discussion, other than personal insults ?
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I think if Sammitch or PJP or WBAM had voiced the same views, you wouldn't have jumped at this post like a bulldog on a short leash. But because you saw it was posted by Wonder Boy, you just jumped into attack mode, like you consistently do to my posts in recent weeks.
That right there is where you victimized yourself.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:...
That was playful use of a remark by Biden that was not meant as an attack on him, or Wednesday either for that matter.
...
OK, I guess I did jump the gun there.
As for the thread in general, your argument isn't really styled to win anyone over. What is your objective? While I don't think your racist, this just reminds me of all the people that I know that feel the need to say "Oh it's their holiday" or "how come we don't have a white history month?".
Quote:
Matter-eater Man said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:...
That was playful use of a remark by Biden that was not meant as an attack on him, or Wednesday either for that matter.
...
OK, I guess I did jump the gun there.
As for the thread in general, your argument isn't really styled to win anyone over. What is your objective? While I don't think your racist, this just reminds me of all the people that I know that feel the need to say "Oh it's their holiday" or "how come we don't have a white history month?".
I appreciate that, M E M.
What I'm saying is that there's a destructive mindset in the dominant liberal black culture in the U.S.
I think Black History month and Martin Luther King Day are potentially good things, if redirected in a more cross-ethnic and unifying way. Emphasizing how far we've come as a nation, and emphasizing black history as a part of the whole of American history, instead of as an afro-centric separatist bitterly self-exclusive culture, as it presently is.
I support the black community, but not in a way that I see as destructive to the rest of the nation, ideologically, divisively, and all too frequently, violently.
I support the black community in a way that includes blacks, ends ideological division, and makes us all a stronger nation.
Quote:
rex said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I think if Sammitch or PJP or WBAM had voiced the same views, you wouldn't have jumped at this post like a bulldog on a short leash. But because you saw it was posted by Wonder Boy, you just jumped into attack mode, like you consistently do to my posts in recent weeks.
That right there is where you victimized yourself.
I didn't "victimize" myself, I just pointed out what a petty and vindictive idiot you've consistently been regarding my posts. I don't feel victimized, I just feel your comments have been a diversion to the serious discussion the grown-ups are having.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
I think a better representation of a whit politician being racist is that guy who said macaca. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in South Africa as a kid and macaca is a racist term for minorities there.
But he's a republican so....
George Allen, wikipedia listing
Allen explains his comment, and video of the incident
Explanation? he made a racial slur. if you slip and say the n word, you still said it. it was still there on the tip of your tongue.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
You know, Jason, I don't doubt that you have another perspective on the issue, and I actually looked forward to seeing your counter-perspective to my views, explaining why you think I'm wrong, from your perspective.
I don't need to. Although he chose to word it in a different manner than I would have, Karl made some very good points that covered much of the same ground any post from me would have.
Plus, I fear you're too far gone. You're too entrenched in sound bites and ignorance for me to reach you. I don't have the time or the patience to spend hours educating you on the counter-perspective. You don't even know the facts. Start there then maybe we'll talk. Or maybe I'll get bored. Until then, a flip remark is all you get.
You know, that's funny.
I only get my racial perception from "soundbytes and ignorance" ?
Gee, that's funny, because I could have sworn I quoted sections from several books I read on the subject, and didn't just draw my opinion from soundbytes. Any soundbytes, actually. Show me where I quoted soundbytes.
You're right. What you've said so far is covered by the ignorance part. Just because it's from a book, doesn't make it an informed opinion, especially when those facts have been proven wrong or inconsequential time and time again.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And while you voice pretty near the maximum dismissive contempt for my conservative opinion, I've done my best to listen to what you have to say
Not really.
You've quoted the same "fact" said the same thing in threads past, a fact you yourself tout. I've shown that they mean nothing. You don't respond when I do. Instead, you bring up the very same "facts" again. Doesn't sound like you're really listening.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
What makes you so damned sure you've got an inside track to "the facts"? I could be equally dismissive of you as being "deeply entrenced" in liberal propaganda, if I so chose to.
Because I've actually researched. I've looked at both sides and questioned what's said. Believe me, I've researched this particular topic more than you could ever dream. And I know when someone is using dated facts that prove nothing. And I know that means you haven't actually done any research passed those books that support the ideals you already hold.
If you have, then tell me what the other side of the discussion has to say. Refute the other side instead of quoting information that was debased as soon as it came out. Because when I bring anything up, you ignore it completely.
Jason E. Perkins didn't quote me. It hurt my feelings.
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Karl Hungus said:
I think a better representation of a whit politician being racist is that guy who said macaca. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in South Africa as a kid and macaca is a racist term for minorities there.
But he's a republican so....
George Allen, wikipedia listing
Allen explains his comment, and video of the incident
Explanation? he made a racial slur. if you slip and say the n word, you still said it. it was still there on the tip of your tongue.
Yeah, it seemed pretty clear to me, comparing the 2nd site to the Wikipedia listing of the incident, to be clear knowledge on Allen's part exactly what "macaca" means, from his time in South Africa & Tunisia.
I included the 2nd link just to show the attempt by his campaign to make an official explanation.
And the video clip.
Wikipedia said Allen also used racist language (the n-word) while in college.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Jason E. Perkins didn't quote me. It hurt my feelings.
Honestly, I thought I did.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
As I said at the beginning of this post, at times it felt like that's how you were coming across. It's a very touchy subject, and there's really not much room for ambiguity.
This is what I meant to quote, your part about ambiguity. I think it's important that if you're going to try to quote "facts" or make conjectures that you don't overstate then get mad when someone takes you literally. Mean what you say. Otherwise you're just backpedalling.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Jason E. Perkins didn't quote me. It hurt my feelings.
Honestly, I thought I did.
My posts are so forgettable that you can't even remember quoting them!!! 
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I didn't "victimize" myself, I just pointed out what a petty and vindictive idiot you've consistently been regarding my posts. I don't feel victimized, I just feel your comments have been a diversion to the serious discussion the grown-ups are having.
Still haven't proven me wrong. I like how you victimize yourself and attack me instead of discussing the actual topic of the thread.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
You know, Jason, I don't doubt that you have another perspective on the issue, and I actually looked forward to seeing your counter-perspective to my views, explaining why you think I'm wrong, from your perspective.
I don't need to. Although he chose to word it in a different manner than I would have, Karl made some very good points that covered much of the same ground any post from me would have.
Plus, I fear you're too far gone. You're too entrenched in sound bites and ignorance for me to reach you. I don't have the time or the patience to spend hours educating you on the counter-perspective. You don't even know the facts. Start there then maybe we'll talk. Or maybe I'll get bored. Until then, a flip remark is all you get.
You know, that's funny.
I only get my racial perception from "soundbytes and ignorance" ?
Gee, that's funny, because I could have sworn I quoted sections from several books I read on the subject, and didn't just draw my opinion from soundbytes. Any soundbytes, actually. Show me where I quoted soundbytes.
You're right. What you've said so far is covered by the ignorance part. Just because it's from a book, doesn't make it an informed opinion, especially when those facts have been proven wrong or inconsequential time and time again.
Perhaps it's your own ignorance?
Basically, you've said that no matter how researched and documented, no matter what the source, you have the answers, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.
More than wrong: ignorant.
You have all the answers, your knowledge is superior on the issue to anyone else's. Because you were born black.
Well, there are many black americans, and many foreign-born black U.S. citizens who disagree with you, and many of them have publicly spoken and written on the subject to say you're dead wrong.
Okay, fine. I'm white, let's assume that disqualifies my opinion. What about them?
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And while you voice pretty near the maximum dismissive contempt for my conservative opinion, I've done my best to listen to what you have to say
Not really.
You've quoted the same "fact" said the same thing in threads past, a fact you yourself tout. I've shown that they mean nothing. You don't respond when I do. Instead, you bring up the very same "facts" again. Doesn't sound like you're really listening.
That's total bullshit on your part.
HERE's my last response to the previous topic, where I voice openness to further considering your perspective, but question by what factual documentation you consider your black-liberal-spin statistics as somehow superior to the U.S. Department of Justice statistics of black criminal arrests and convictions.
I remained open to your opinion. You're the one who walked away, and didn't offer documentation to support your views.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
What makes you so damned sure you've got an inside track to "the facts"? I could be equally dismissive of you as being "deeply entrenced" in liberal propaganda, if I so chose to.
Because I've actually researched. I've looked at both sides and questioned what's said. Believe me, I've researched this particular topic more than you could ever dream. And I know when someone is using dated facts that prove nothing. And I know that means you haven't actually done any research passed those books that support the ideals you already hold.
If you have, then tell me what the other side of the discussion has to say. Refute the other side instead of quoting information that was debased as soon as it came out. Because when I bring anything up, you ignore it completely.
I've read articles as I've found them, representing both sides of the issue, and not found the black-liberal perspective you advocate to be credible.
The black liberal opposition's argument is always that the statistics for crime, education, etc., somehow always misrepresent black criminality, education, etc. And yet they somehow accurately reflect the status of every other racial demographic group.
What you voice is more of a conspiracy theory-- of deliberate misrepresentation of arrest and conviction records, to keep blacks from being accurately represented --than a documented credible argument.
As I've said before, even black police officers look at black suspects with more scrutiny. That's not "prejudice". That's experience, based on reality of who the criminals consistently are.
I'll start here and respond in the way I would.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
No, it isn't. Is it a statement of any significance that there was a shooting last year on Washington Boulevard in Pembroke Pines? What happens on a street named after someone has absolutely nothing to do with what they did in their lifetime. I could name my dog Rush Limbaugh. If he bites someone it means I have an ill-tempered dog that needs training ASAP. That's it.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said across several topics now (contrary to the "white racist" stereotype the liberal media likes to project) it is in fact blacks who commit the majority of racial violence against whites, at a ratio of about 50 incidents to 1.
You've said this before and I've responded to it. I'll quote.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
The last topic we had like this, I quoted some statistics on black on white crime (that occurs at about a ratio of 50-to-1, statistically). Even at a fraction of 1%, that is an alarming statistic.
But again, the liberal media stereotype leads the public, both blacks and whites, to believe that it is the reverse: that a majority of racial violence is against blacks, by whites. That is an infuriating misrepresentation of statistics.
This is what I really wanted to address, and sadly, I don't have much time. So I'll make it quick.
Last part first: that's funny. Seriously, I don't know where you got the idea that the media portrays white-on-black crime more heavily than black-on-white crime. I know that's the newest outcry from people on this side of the issue, but I don't even know where that comes from. It's not a statistic. Statistics point in the other direction--waaay into the other direction. So far into the other direction that news outlets have moved to remove assertions of race from news reports completely. It's that bad. But to believe that white people are the victims here is outright ridiculous. Please show me where you get this from.
Now, about the 50:1. I have five minutes so here we go. That 50:1 statistic was first brought to light by a book called "The Color of Crime: Race, Crime and Violence in America," by white nationalist, Jared Taylor. I say white nationalist because that's what he is, by his own admission. Taylor writes for and publishes a magazine called American Renaissance. If you don't know it, look it up. You'll find it in one of the seediest corners of the internet. You know how you say we should have an open dialog between the races. Just one look at the forums that surround the many sites devoted to Mr. Jared and his thoughts will show you why that has yet to happen. He's a big proponent of the idea of black genetic inferiority.
I tell you this not to show evidence that these numbers are incorrect--at least not yet--but to at least show how there might be a little bias shown in these numbers.
Now here's the deal in a nutshell. That statistic is true...sorta, but very incomplete. First, there are only two usual reasons to show that statistic: a) to provide credence to the argument that black people hate white people and, thus, commit racially charged violent crimes against them specifically, or b) to provide credence to the idea that black people are more violent, and therefore should be feared and profiled. There might be a c) or even a d) I'm missing, but I can't think of it now.
I'm typing mighty fast.
I'll address point a. First, these numbers come from the U.S. Justice Department. One problem with these numbers that you might not be aware of, though, is that when they were taken, the data for "whites" included those termed Hispanic by the Census, since nine in ten Latinos and Latinas are considered racially white by government record-keepers. If the numbers are split up to count Latinos separate from whites, you find that in any given year the majority of victims of violent crimes perpetrated by black people are people of color, not whites.
The other problem with Taylor's numbers is actually given light by another part of his argument. He states that these numbers are way out of whack since blacks are a small majority of the population. However, that's a two-sided coin. In 2002, whites were about 81.5 percent of the population (we're including Latinos now). That same year, "whites" were 51 percent of the victims of violent crimes committed by blacks. This tells us that white people were victimized less often by blacks than would be expected given the idea of random chance. In other words, if black people victimized white people LESS often than they should have if they had ignored the victim's race entirely.
I hope I was clear. I'm just going stream-of-conscious at this point.
Point b: We should profile by race. Here's the problem with that: according to several studies (none of which are addressed by Taylor) when community and personal economic status is compared between whites and blacks, there are no significant racial crime difference. Basically, if we ARE to profile, we should look in a person's bank account, not their skin color.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Something motivates this violence by blacks against other racial groups. And I beleive it's the sense of entitlement, of something owed to blacks. An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence.
Let's talk about this. Lets talk about it because you talk about "An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence." And although I'm sure you'd respond once again by stating that you don't MEAN every black person, I'm sure most people wouldn't take your quote that way. And while you may not feel bothered to have to use the words "most" or "some" when talking about black crime, I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way if I said white people are racist based on this, so let's be clear.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And of liberal rationalization, not only within the black community, but also by non-black liberal politicians pandering to the black community, that rationalize such incidents as understandable backlash to "generations of racism" or whatever.
Okay, there's way too much opinion here based on generalizations. There is no way that anyone could prove or disprove this.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I say it again: every racial group on Earth has been discriminated against by every other group who could do so. Blacks are not unique in their suffering !
Should I sue the Italians for their Roman ancestors invading and seizing property of my ancestors?
The Huns?
The Vandals? The Visigoths?
The French?
The Scandinavians?
The Mongols?
How much is enough?
Well, first what you're saying is based on the "indoctinated sense of rage" you sense, and I'm sure that if I asked you to prove it, you'd show me where someone somewhere said something and hold that up as proof that many more people feel the same way. Unless you can give much better proof of this "sense of rage" that you deem so prevalent, this doesn't hold water.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I'm proud of the fact that the United States has come so far with civil rights. And I regard the attitude that clings to the past, and pretends it's still 1965, as spoiled, arrogant..
Again, you assume that this attitude exists. I'll bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone, black or white, who would say things are the same as they were in '65. This is another assumption you've made.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
...and a breeding ground for precisely the kind of violence this article cites. I can discuss similar incidents, that are just as close to my home.
I can show and tell you many tales of white-on-black racism, from my personal life, from news stories, and I can even link to a few forums where white people are saying things about blacks that would make your hair stand on end. But I wouldn't, because it wouldn't prove anything more than that there are a few people who feel a certain way. It sure wouldn't say anything about an entire community.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
This attitude in the black community has to end, so the nation can move on, and blacks can enjoy the freedom that truly exists now.
Things aren't equal, ignorance and racism still exists. There's proof of that everywhere. Only those who choose to ignore it can't see.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said previously, while there are many incidents of black violence against other racial groups, there are many more blacks who feel that indoctrinated anger, but would not take that anger to the level of violence. But the indoctinated angry message is there just the same, and that is the true cause of alienation between blacks and the rest of America.
What are you basing this on? Your own insight into the black community? Please tell me more.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And I have to wonder based on that: Are Martin Luther King Day and Black History Month true celebrations of freedom?
Or are they, in truth, part of the divisive "hate whitey" culture of rage?
It is whatever most individuals make it out to be. So far I've been shown where one black person and a group of white people have turned it into something else. A few dozen at most out of hundred of millions.
Seriously, I responded to this. I don't know where my posts are going today.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Perhaps it's your own ignorance?
Basically, you've said that no matter how researched and documented, no matter what the source, you have the answers, and anyone who disagrees with you is wrong.
More than wrong: ignorant.
You have all the answers, your knowledge is superior on the issue to anyone else's. Because you were born black.
Well, there are many black americans, and many foreign-born black U.S. citizens who disagree with you, and many of them have publicly spoken and written on the subject to say you're dead wrong.
Okay, fine. I'm white, let's assume that disqualifies my opinion. What about them?
Didn't you just jump down Karl's throat for putting words in your mouth? Maybe you should follow your own advice.
I never said that my race made me more knowledgeable or that your race made you any less. I said that I've researched both sides and that THAT made me more knowledgeable and invited you to prove that you too have researched the other side by telling me what you know. If you can't, fine. But now you're playing the race card when your race and mine weren't even an issue.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
That's total bullshit on your part.
HERE's my last response to the previous topic, where I voice openness to further considering your perspective, but question by what factual documentation you consider your black-liberal-spin statistics as somehow superior to the U.S. Department of Justice statistics of black criminal arrests and convictions.
Again, you're saying that something happened that didn't. Where did I show "black-liberal-spin statistics"?
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I remained open to your opinion. You're the one who walked away, and didn't offer documentation to support your views.
Do you really want to know why I walked away? It's because you cherry picked. You did it in that thread and you're doing it in this thread. You're ignoring portions of posts (such as the part of my previous post from the other thread I quoted and all the parts of other people's posts I quoted earlier) and focusing on the parts you want to debate. I'd rather not go through the effort of typing paragraph after paragraph to no avail.
That's why I left the discussion.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I've read articles as I've found them, representing both sides of the issue, and not found the black-liberal perspective you advocate to be credible.
The black liberal opposition's argument is always that the statistics for crime, education, etc., somehow always misrepresent black criminality, education, etc. And yet they somehow accurately reflect the status of every other racial demographic group.
Show me where you found this.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
What you voice is more of a conspiracy theory-- of deliberate misrepresentation of arrest and conviction records, to keep blacks from being accurately represented --than a documented credible argument.
Aren't you saying that there's a liberal media conspiracy?
I've given you numbers before based on credible sources, but you chose not to believe. Fine, I'll use your own sources.
Feel free to show me where any liberal spin is used.
First I'll quote you numbers from the U.S. Department of Justice. But I won't use the numbers you used. Why? Because they're from the 1990s.
In 2002 the Justice Department reported that blacks committed roughly 1.2 million violent crimes. That's all violent crimes. Black on black, black on white, black on little green aliens. All of it. That number is significantly less than the numbers given in the 50:1 report used by Jared Taylor and co.
Any liberal spin yet?
Okay, same year. In 2002 there were approximately 29.3 million blacks in the U.S. 12 and over. That puts the black crime rate at 4 percent, or 40 crimes per 1000 black males.
Of course, you might be assuming right now that means that 40 out of every 1000 black males committed some form of violent crime in 2002. However, that's just silly. A majority of all crimes are committed by repeat offenders. If you really need more sources for that, I'll provide them, but really it's just common sense and I'm not sure how you can possibly see that as liberal spin.
So let's take some numbers. I'll even use numbers more conservative than those in the above link. Sources say that 70 percent of all crime is committed by about 7 percent of all offenders. And those aren't even the most stringent numbers. Those are the numbers based on a report out of USF. That report, by the way, has absolutely nothing to do with race. It actually argues against light punishment and letting people out on bail. Anywho, that means that 840,000 of the crimes by blacks would have been committed by just 7 percent of the black offenders. The other 93% would have committed the other 360,000.
Where's the liberal spin?
Now, after a quick trip to the calculator we find that this means that by generally acceptable reasoning (by both the liberal and conservative perspective), 387,000 black males between the ages of 12 and infinity committed violent crimes of some sort in 2002. 387,000 out of 29.3 million black males. That's .13 percent. I'll throw you a Jared Taylor handicap and double that. 774,000 yields .26 percent. Just over one quarter of a percent from a race filled with a "sense of rage." And yeah, that isn't black on white. In fact, black on white is less than half (it has to be since black on black is greater and we're not even including other races). Taking you back down to .13 percent with Jared in mind.
You're right, we must hate you.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said before, even black police officers look at black suspects with more scrutiny. That's not "prejudice". That's experience, based on reality of who the criminals consistently are.
Wow, this is...this is racist!
I mean, there's no way to deny it. Not only are you saying that looking at black suspects with more scrutiny isn't prejudice, but that it should be so.
I'm speechless!
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
I'll start here and respond in the way I would.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
No, it isn't. Is it a statement of any significance that there was a shooting last year on Washington Boulevard in Pembroke Pines? What happens on a street named after someone has absolutely nothing to do with what they did in their lifetime. I could name my dog Rush Limbaugh. If he bites someone it means I have an ill-tempered dog that needs training ASAP. That's it.
That's a silly answer.
Streets named Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard are named with a clear intent to invoke the person and writings of Martin Luther King Jr.
Naming your dog "Fluffy" or "Rush Limbaugh" clearly doesn't have anything resembling the same intent.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said across several topics now (contrary to the "white racist" stereotype the liberal media likes to project) it is in fact blacks who commit the majority of racial violence against whites, at a ratio of about 50 incidents to 1.
You've said this before and I've responded to it. I'll quote.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
The last topic we had like this, I quoted some statistics on black on white crime (that occurs at about a ratio of 50-to-1, statistically). Even at a fraction of 1%, that is an alarming statistic.
But again, the liberal media stereotype leads the public, both blacks and whites, to believe that it is the reverse: that a majority of racial violence is against blacks, by whites. That is an infuriating misrepresentation of statistics.
This is what I really wanted to address, and sadly, I don't have much time. So I'll make it quick.
Last part first: that's funny. Seriously, I don't know where you got the idea that the media portrays white-on-black crime more heavily than black-on-white crime. I know that's the newest outcry from people on this side of the issue, but I don't even know where that comes from. It's not a statistic. Statistics point in the other direction--waaay into the other direction. So far into the other direction that news outlets have moved to remove assertions of race from news reports completely. It's that bad. But to believe that white people are the victims here is outright ridiculous. Please show me where you get this from.
Now, about the 50:1. I have five minutes so here we go. That 50:1 statistic was first brought to light by a book called "The Color of Crime: Race, Crime and Violence in America," by white nationalist, Jared Taylor. I say white nationalist because that's what he is, by his own admission. Taylor writes for and publishes a magazine called American Renaissance. If you don't know it, look it up. You'll find it in one of the seediest corners of the internet. You know how you say we should have an open dialog between the races. Just one look at the forums that surround the many sites devoted to Mr. Jared and his thoughts will show you why that has yet to happen. He's a big proponent of the idea of black genetic inferiority.
I tell you this not to show evidence that these numbers are incorrect--at least not yet--but to at least show how there might be a little bias shown in these numbers.
Now here's the deal in a nutshell. That statistic is true...sorta, but very incomplete. First, there are only two usual reasons to show that statistic: a) to provide credence to the argument that black people hate white people and, thus, commit racially charged violent crimes against them specifically, or b) to provide credence to the idea that black people are more violent, and therefore should be feared and profiled. There might be a c) or even a d) I'm missing, but I can't think of it now.
I'm typing mighty fast.
I'll address point a. First, these numbers come from the U.S. Justice Department. One problem with these numbers that you might not be aware of, though, is that when they were taken, the data for "whites" included those termed Hispanic by the Census, since nine in ten Latinos and Latinas are considered racially white by government record-keepers. If the numbers are split up to count Latinos separate from whites, you find that in any given year the majority of victims of violent crimes perpetrated by black people are people of color, not whites.
The other problem with Taylor's numbers is actually given light by another part of his argument. He states that these numbers are way out of whack since blacks are a small majority of the population. However, that's a two-sided coin. In 2002, whites were about 81.5 percent of the population (we're including Latinos now). That same year, "whites" were 51 percent of the victims of violent crimes committed by blacks. This tells us that white people were victimized less often by blacks than would be expected given the idea of random chance. In other words, if black people victimized white people LESS often than they should have if they had ignored the victim's race entirely.
I hope I was clear. I'm just going stream-of-conscious at this point.
Point b: We should profile by race. Here's the problem with that: according to several studies (none of which are addressed by Taylor) when community and personal economic status is compared between whites and blacks, there are no significant racial crime difference. Basically, if we ARE to profile, we should look in a person's bank account, not their skin color.
I notice you've also not included my response to this post, where I answered the points you raised.
Yours is clearly a one-sided response, that ignores the counter-response to the issues raised, that I've already given.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Something motivates this violence by blacks against other racial groups. And I beleive it's the sense of entitlement, of something owed to blacks. An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence.
Let's talk about this. Lets talk about it because you talk about "An indoctinated sense of rage, that blacks are somehow given license to lash out in acts of violence." And although I'm sure you'd respond once again by stating that you don't MEAN every black person, I'm sure most people wouldn't take your quote that way. And while you may not feel bothered to have to use the words "most" or "some" when talking about black crime, I'm sure you wouldn't feel the same way if I said white people are racist based on this, so let's be clear.
My repeated responses above make clear that I unquestionably don't mean "all blacks" are indoctrinated in this hostile victim/justified-retribution mindset. But that the prevalent message is put out there to all blacks in the U.S., that a large percentage reject that hostile/victim ideology, a large percentage buy into that hostile/victim ideology, and a smaller percentage not only buy into it but are moved to violence by that hostile ideology.
It's annoying that I've repeatedly said this, and that you've ignored my clarity on this point.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And of liberal rationalization, not only within the black community, but also by non-black liberal politicians pandering to the black community, that rationalize such incidents as understandable backlash to "generations of racism" or whatever.
Okay, there's way too much opinion here based on generalizations. There is no way that anyone could prove or disprove this.
I think the comments by local black and liberal politicians after the innocent verdict of the 4 police officers who beat Rodney King, and the way it led directly to riots in Los Angeles, makes my point quite nicely.
And the whole "free the L.A. Four" for the 4 black thugs who almost murdered white truck driver Reginald Denny, whose only crime was driving down the wrong street.
TIME magazine in this period had a cover-story on the nationwide reluctance of blacks on juries to convict a black suspect and put him in jail, no matter what the evidence.
There are similar political statements by leaders of other major cities nationwide, pandering to liberal black voters, surrounding similar incidents of suspects beaten or killed by police that erupted in riots.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I say it again: every racial group on Earth has been discriminated against by every other group who could do so. Blacks are not unique in their suffering !
Should I sue the Italians for their Roman ancestors invading and seizing property of my ancestors?
The Huns?
The Vandals? The Visigoths?
The French?
The Scandinavians?
The Mongols?
How much is enough?
Well, first what you're saying is based on the "indoctinated sense of rage" you sense, and I'm sure that if I asked you to prove it, you'd show me where someone somewhere said something and hold that up as proof that many more people feel the same way. Unless you can give much better proof of this "sense of rage" that you deem so prevalent, this doesn't hold water.
The very calls from the black community for "compensation" for past racism, sheds light on the unrelenting anger and keeping alive spectres of past racism that have been gone since at least 1965.
As I said, such clinging to the past makes it impossible for healing between whites and blacks to occur.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I'm proud of the fact that the United States has come so far with civil rights. And I regard the attitude that clings to the past, and pretends it's still 1965, as spoiled, arrogant..
Again, you assume that this attitude exists. I'll bet you'd be hard pressed to find anyone, black or white, who would say things are the same as they were in '65. This is another assumption you've made.
Well, you yourself keep saying that racism still exists, and that blacks are still the victims of ongoing racism.
You've said that more directly in previous topics, but your talk about crime and education statistics being misrepresented (which you just quoted at length from the previous topic, while conveniently omitting my previous response) clearly manifests that here.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
...and a breeding ground for precisely the kind of violence this article cites. I can discuss similar incidents, that are just as close to my home.
I can show tell you many tales of white-on-black racism, from my personal life, from news stories, and I can even link to a few forums where white people are saying things about blacks that would make your hair stand on end. But I wouldn't, because it wouldn't prove anything more than that there are a few people who feel a certain way. It sure wouldn't say anything about an entire community.
So why mention it at all?
I can also discuss personal incidents, where I was bullied on a daily basis by a black guy twice my size, where a group of blacks tricked me into a blind corner, and would have beat the shit out of me if I hadn't given up my tickets at a football game, where I had a potential black manager grill me in a way that he never would have a black applicant, black managers who were discriminatory on the job toward white employees, black co-workers who excluded myself and other white employees, despite our best efforts to include them; and on and on.
I have first hand seen many incidents of the expectation of racist treatment, where blacks have made a huge issue out of nothing, because that carry that hostile/victim ideology inside them, and wait for the opportunity to lash out at the slightest perceived racism.
Conversely, I've seen incidents of unquestionable true racism toward blacks as well. One in particular an assistant manager at a Steakhouse I waited tables at. I quit shortly after he was pressured to leave. I knew he'd taken a manager job at Friday's restaurant, and I was pleased in 1992 to see him as the general manager of a Fridays location. He experienced discrimination, and persevered. The manager who discriminated against im at Steak & Ale was fired, and was unable to get another manager job elsewhere.
I don't deny that true racism toward blacks occurs, but I think it is far more often a false spectre.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
This attitude in the black community has to end, so the nation can move on, and blacks can enjoy the freedom that truly exists now.
Things aren't equal, ignorance and racism still exists. There's proof of that everywhere. Only those who choose to ignore it can't see.
Have I ignored it? Or have I acknowledged that it does exist, but that the divisive attitude and ideology that is indoctrinated into a large percentage of the American black community, is as big a problem as incidents of true racism against blacks?
I've said this consistently all along.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
As I've said previously, while there are many incidents of black violence against other racial groups, there are many more blacks who feel that indoctrinated anger, but would not take that anger to the level of violence. But the indoctinated angry message is there just the same, and that is the true cause of alienation between blacks and the rest of America.
What are you basing this on? Your own insight into the black community? Please tell me more.
I think that's clear enough. The indoctrinated victim mentality and hysterical cries of racism at every turn, are the cause of black alienation. And open-minded whites who are sympathetic to true racism, get tired of dealing with the hostility, to the point that we at times would rather avoid interacting with blacks, when we pick up the vibe of what their attitude toward whites is.
I say this from articles I've read, as well as my own experience working with black co-workers.
Some jobs I work with blacks, and we get along and socialize, both at work and outside the office.
Others, where I get the clear signals of hostility, I remain friendly, but avoid interaction.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
And I have to wonder based on that: Are Martin Luther King Day and Black History Month true celebrations of freedom?
Or are they, in truth, part of the divisive "hate whitey" culture of rage?
It is whatever most individuals make it out to be. So far I've been shown where one black person and a group of white people have turned it into something else. A few dozen at most out of hundred of millions.
My experience with blacks on this issue is more 50/50 ratio of hostile mindset toward whites. Sometimes more hostile, sometimes less. Usually the more educated the environment (such as working for a healthcare company, with black nurses), the more friendly and less race-separated. The less educated (such as an insurance company mailroom, or an auto rental company) the more divided black and white are.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
I'll start here and respond in the way I would.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
No, it isn't. Is it a statement of any significance that there was a shooting last year on Washington Boulevard in Pembroke Pines? What happens on a street named after someone has absolutely nothing to do with what they did in their lifetime. I could name my dog Rush Limbaugh. If he bites someone it means I have an ill-tempered dog that needs training ASAP. That's it.
That's a silly answer.
Streets named Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard are named with a clear intent to invoke the person and writings of Martin Luther King Jr.
Naming your dog "Fluffy" or "Rush Limbaugh" clearly doesn't have anything resembling the same intent.
What?
A.) You skipped the part about Washington Blvd. I'll let it go, though.
B.) If I name my dog Rush Limbaugh, I have "a clear intent to invoke the person and writings of" Rush Limbaugh. That's obvious.
You're being silly.
And thus the point remains. What happens on any given Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard has nothing to do with the man himself. Nothing more than the dog, Rush Limbaugh, and the man himself.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I notice you've also not included my response to this post, where I answered the points you raised.
Yours is clearly a one-sided response, that ignores the counter-response to the issues raised, that I've already given.
And I responded to that response. Remember this?
But I'm not going to quibble over who responded to what. As I've said, I stopped responding because you cherry picked. However, if you want a response to the statistics you last gave I'll give it to you in one shot.
In 2000, after the surge in black population in the 90's and long after the numbers you gave in your response were taken, 211 million people reported themselves as "White alone" which accounted for 75% of the U.S. population. Up to 35 million people--12% of the population-reported themselves as "Black only." That's roughly 6:1.
And again, that means that the numbers you gave were all less than they would have been by blind chance were race not involved at all.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
My repeated responses above make clear that I unquestionably don't mean "all blacks" are indoctrinated in this hostile victim/justified-retribution mindset. But that the prevalent message is put out there to all blacks in the U.S., that a large percentage reject that hostile/victim ideology, a large percentage buy into that hostile/victim ideology, and a smaller percentage not only buy into it but are moved to violence by that hostile ideology.
It's annoying that I've repeatedly said this, and that you've ignored my clarity on this point.
It's annoying that you've repeatedly ignored requests from myself and others to clarify when you mean some, most, or all. You feel it's okay to make grand sweeping statements, because we should simply know what you mean.
Sorry, I'm not a mind reader. Feel free to get angry because I'm asking you to be clear. Then go ahead and do whatever you feel delivers the right message.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I think the comments by local black and liberal politicians after the innocent verdict of the 4 police officers who beat Rodney King, and the way it led directly to riots in Los Angeles, makes my point quite nicely.
And the whole "free the L.A. Four" for the 4 black thugs who almost murdered white truck driver Reginald Denny, whose only crime was driving down the wrong street.
TIME magazine in this period had a cover-story on the nationwide reluctance of blacks on juries to convict a black suspect and put him in jail, no matter what the evidence.
There are similar political statements by leaders of other major cities nationwide, pandering to liberal black voters, surrounding similar incidents of suspects beaten or killed by police that erupted in riots.
Show me.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
The very calls from the black community for "compensation" for past racism, sheds light on the unrelenting anger and keeping alive spectres of past racism that have been gone since at least 1965.
As I said, such clinging to the past makes it impossible for healing between whites and blacks to occur.
Again, show me. Show me where "the black community" is asking for compensation. I would LOVE to see this. Or do you mean "some blacks" want reparations? And by "some blacks" I mean an extreme minority. I'm really not sure, and as I've said I'm not a mind reader.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
You've said that more directly in previous topics, but your talk about crime and education statistics being misrepresented (which you just quoted at length from the previous topic, while conveniently omitting my previous response) clearly manifests that here.
What?
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
I can show tell you many tales of white-on-black racism, from my personal life, from news stories, and I can even link to a few forums where white people are saying things about blacks that would make your hair stand on end. But I wouldn't, because it wouldn't prove anything more than that there are a few people who feel a certain way. It sure wouldn't say anything about an entire community.
So why mention it at all?
Ummm...that's my point. Why mention that there are incidents that have happened near your home? There's no reason.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I can also discuss personal incidents, where I was bullied on a daily basis by a black guy twice my size, where a group of blacks tricked me into a blind corner, and would have beat the shit out of me if I hadn't given up my tickets at a football game, where I had a potential black manager grill me in a way that he never would have a black applicant, black managers who were discriminatory on the job toward white employees, black co-workers who excluded myself and other white employees, despite our best efforts to include them; and on and on.
I have first hand seen many incidents of the expectation of racist treatment, where blacks have made a huge issue out of nothing, because that carry that hostile/victim ideology inside them, and wait for the opportunity to lash out at the slightest perceived racism.
So that's why you assume that blacks are a certain way in general. This makes so much more sense.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I don't deny that true racism toward blacks occurs, but I think it is far more often a false spectre.
Based on?
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Have I ignored it? Or have I acknowledged that it does exist, but that the divisive attitude and ideology that is indoctrinated into a large percentage of the American black community, is as big a problem as incidents of true racism against blacks?
You continue to allude to the idea that blacks should get over it, stop feeling like victims, and move on so that America can move forward and we can stop being alienated. However, nowhere in any of these posts have you said that whites have to do anything. If you have, correct me with a link.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I think that's clear enough. The indoctrinated victim mentality and hysterical cries of racism at every turn, are the cause of black alienation. And open-minded whites who are sympathetic to true racism, get tired of dealing with the hostility, to the point that we at times would rather avoid interacting with blacks, when we pick up the vibe of what their attitude toward whites is.
The open-minded whites?
Is that...supposed to include you?
You just said cops are right to look at black suspects more closely. You refute information that opposes your view as "liberal spin". But you're one of the open-minded white people who we should cater our mentalities and actions to?
To you?
No.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I say this from articles I've read, as well as my own experience working with black co-workers.
Some jobs I work with blacks, and we get along and socialize, both at work and outside the office.
Others, where I get the clear signals of hostility, I remain friendly, but avoid interaction.
My experience with blacks on this issue is more 50/50 ratio of hostile mindset toward whites. Sometimes more hostile, sometimes less. Usually the more educated the environment (such as working for a healthcare company, with black nurses), the more friendly and less race-separated. The less educated (such as an insurance company mailroom, or an auto rental company) the more divided black and white are.
White. Hot. Fear.
I pity you. You're a victim of your own self-perpetuating paranoia.
You know, I've thought about this (to the point where I can no longer enjoy the Bowl) and I think I finally understand.
I really do pity you, Wonder Boy, and I finally think I might understand you--at least in part. You've been victimized in the past and that's sad, but what's even sadder is that it's forced you to take on ideals that defy logic or understanding. It's a convenient fear. This mindset you have means that maybe for you those things happened not because of something you did or plain misfortune, but because of something you couldn't control: other people's feelings concerning their race and yours. And who knows? Maybe in at least one time it was.
I'm sorry, Wonder Boy. Not because I'm black and I feel that I'm responsible for the things every other black person do, but because the things that happened to you shouldn't happen to anyone, no matter what the reason.
And I hope that one day you'll be able to see beyond race and not think that 50% of all black people have something against you because you're white. I hope that for you and everyone, white, black, and everything else. THEN we can move forward.
Wonder Boy, you are using some sort of strange "Anti - logic" which I cannot comprehend.
I wish you could see this. That is all that I have to say on this subject. Others have already spoken very succinctly here, and any arguments I can muster would only be repeating what has already been said.
And, yeah, this is coming from me, a person who normally is very neutral in this forum, sorta like a one man Switzerland.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
I'll start here and respond in the way I would.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
No, it isn't. Is it a statement of any significance that there was a shooting last year on Washington Boulevard in Pembroke Pines? What happens on a street named after someone has absolutely nothing to do with what they did in their lifetime. I could name my dog Rush Limbaugh. If he bites someone it means I have an ill-tempered dog that needs training ASAP. That's it.
That's a silly answer.
Streets named Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard are named with a clear intent to invoke the person and writings of Martin Luther King Jr.
Naming your dog "Fluffy" or "Rush Limbaugh" clearly doesn't have anything resembling the same intent.
What?
A.) You skipped the part about Washington Blvd. I'll let it go, though.
B.) If I name my dog Rush Limbaugh, I have "a clear intent to invoke the person and writings of" Rush Limbaugh. That's obvious.
You're being silly.
And thus the point remains. What happens on any given Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard has nothing to do with the man himself. Nothing more than the dog, Rush Limbaugh, and the man himself.
A) Naming a street after Martin Luther King is not something the majority of Americans would push for. These streets clearly represent exclusively the black community, and Kings words and "Dream" of a "table of brotherhood". I've been abundantly clear, that this is unquestionably a more symbolic act than the naming of your average Washington Avenue.
That the black community allows these places to be the centers of crime and violence that they are ist to me, and I think many white Americans, quite telling.
Despite your spinning it otherwise.
It is clearly black Americans who named these King Boulevards, and it is clearly black Americans who allow them to be what they are, in their black neighborhoods.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I notice you've also not included my response to this post, where I answered the points you raised.
Yours is clearly a one-sided response, that ignores the counter-response to the issues raised, that I've already given.
And I responded to that response. Remember this?
But I'm not going to quibble over who responded to what. As I've said, I stopped responding because you cherry picked.
I haven't "cherry picked" what I've responded to in your posts, I've taken your points one by one and responded to them in order.
I don't know how you can say that, when I've made every effort to respond to each of your voluminous points. And I realize my answers haven't been short either, but it's been in an effort to be clear.
But even when I'm clear, you don't give me credit for my clarity, while also squeezing in your way-off-the-mark psychoanalysis, alleging I blame blacks and have a "White. Hot. Paranoia.", when I clearly am not closed off to all blacks, only those who are openly hostile to me. And even with those, I make every effort to be friendly and courteous.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
However, if you want a response to the statistics you last gave I'll give it to you in one shot.
In 2000, after the surge in black population in the 90's and long after the numbers you gave in your response were taken, 211 million people reported themselves as "White alone" which accounted for 75% of the U.S. population. Up to 35 million people--12% of the population-reported themselves as "Black only." That's roughly 6:1.
And again, that means that the numbers you gave were all less than they would have been by blind chance were race not involved at all.
I get the basic drift of your point, although it's not 100% clear.
I really am trying to understand and respect your point of view, despite your personal mischaracterizations of me.
As I understand your point to be above, you're saying that the statistical numbers of black and white aren't quite equal to how they identify themselves in racial census.
But I would still argue that the census is accurate, because it represents how individuals themselves, both black and white, identify themselves in the census.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
My repeated responses above make clear that I unquestionably don't mean "all blacks" are indoctrinated in this hostile victim/justified-retribution mindset. But that the prevalent message is put out there to all blacks in the U.S., that a large percentage reject that hostile/victim ideology, a large percentage buy into that hostile/victim ideology, and a smaller percentage not only buy into it but are moved to violence by that hostile ideology.
It's annoying that I've repeatedly said this, and that you've ignored my clarity on this point.
It's annoying that you've repeatedly ignored requests from myself and others to clarify when you mean some, most, or all. You feel it's okay to make grand sweeping statements, because we should simply know what you mean.
Sorry, I'm not a mind reader. Feel free to get angry because I'm asking you to be clear. Then go ahead and do whatever you feel delivers the right message.
No, what's really annoying is that I've repeatedly answered this question, and you ignore my point.
I said that there's no way to fully tabulate how many blacks reject the liberal victims/justified retribution mindset.
Or how many buy into it and have an open or hidden hostility toward whites.
Only the crimes of those who commit violence can be measured.
But this much is clear: the victimized/something owed mentality is out there every day, constantly sold to blacks in broadcast political discussions, music, black television and movies, comedy, etc.
The message that "we are victims" is constantly out there to every black American. To the point that even I, as a white male, can flip channels, listen to music, see it perpetuated in movies and hear that perception repeated in the breakroom or in the neighboring cubicles at work.
So... don't try to tell me it's my imagination. I see it in every conceivable form of entertainment, and even at work.
You say there's discrimination you've personally experienced, and "thoroughly researched".
And yet mock me as "White.Hot.Paranoid." for pointing out what is painfully obvious to even a casual observer of black popular culture.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I think the comments by local black and liberal politicians after the innocent verdict of the 4 police officers who beat Rodney King, and the way it led directly to riots in Los Angeles, makes my point quite nicely.
And the whole "free the L.A. Four" for the 4 black thugs who almost murdered white truck driver Reginald Denny, whose only crime was driving down the wrong street.
TIME magazine in this period had a cover-story on the nationwide reluctance of blacks on juries to convict a black suspect and put him in jail, no matter what the evidence.
There are similar political statements by leaders of other major cities nationwide, pandering to liberal black voters, surrounding similar incidents of suspects beaten or killed by police that erupted in riots.
Show me.
There was an incident in Chicago about a year after the 1992 L.A. riots surrounding Rodney King.
There have been multiple riots in Miami, in 1979, in 1990, and others I've forgotten. And in other major cities. It's hard to remember all of them.
All of them involved pandering by local politicians to the black community, that I think crossed a line and gave too much sympathy to black rioters.
Demanding justice is understandable. Rioting is quite another.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
The very calls from the black community for "compensation" for past racism, sheds light on the unrelenting anger and keeping alive spectres of past racism that have been gone since at least 1965.
As I said, such clinging to the past makes it impossible for healing between whites and blacks to occur.
Again, show me. Show me where "the black community" is asking for compensation. I would LOVE to see this. Or do you mean "some blacks" want reparations? And by "some blacks" I mean an extreme minority. I'm really not sure, and as I've said I'm not a mind reader.
It's been all over the news for years.
Okay, some blacks, sure, yes.
But it clearly reflects a widespread attitude among black americans of being owed something, and feeling a disproportionate lingering hostility about past discrimination that has not existed in over 40 years.
You could say that "only some" Americans fought in World War II (about 16 million, out of a then-population of about 140 million Americans).
You could say "only some" of Germans were Nazis or SS members. But it was still a widespread and influential movement.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
You've said that more directly in previous topics, but your talk about crime and education statistics being misrepresented (which you just quoted at length from the previous topic, while conveniently omitting my previous response) clearly manifests that here.
What?
What you just said. That U.S. Justice Department statistics of arrests allegedly don't reflect the real numbers on black crime and white crime.
And the similar argument that SAT tests don't reflect black intelligence, because they're written in coded language that whites understand and blacks have a lesser knowledge of.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
I can show tell you many tales of white-on-black racism, from my personal life, from news stories, and I can even link to a few forums where white people are saying things about blacks that would make your hair stand on end. But I wouldn't, because it wouldn't prove anything more than that there are a few people who feel a certain way. It sure wouldn't say anything about an entire community.
So why mention it at all?
Ummm...that's my point. Why mention that there are incidents that have happened near your home? There's no reason.
You mentioned it as near your home, as if that had some personal significance, Jason.
I just made the point that the same can be said from my perspective.
Again, the larger point is that black-on-white race-based "hate-crimes" seem to occur in disproportionally high numbers, as compared to the reverse, at a ratio of 50-to-1.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I can also discuss personal incidents, where I was bullied on a daily basis by a black guy twice my size, where a group of blacks tricked me into a blind corner, and would have beat the shit out of me if I hadn't given up my tickets at a football game, where I had a potential black manager grill me in a way that he never would have a black applicant, black managers who were discriminatory on the job toward white employees, black co-workers who excluded myself and other white employees, despite our best efforts to include them; and on and on.
I have first hand seen many incidents of the expectation of racist treatment, where blacks have made a huge issue out of nothing, because that carry that hostile/victim ideology inside them, and wait for the opportunity to lash out at the slightest perceived racism.
So that's why you assume that blacks are a certain way in general. This makes so much more sense.
So despite that I've saidall along it's a percentage of blacks who are indoctrinated into this ubiquitous victim/justified-retribution message that is constantly pumped out to the black community, despite my clear interaction with black friends and co-workers (those who don't have the race-based hostile attitude problem). Despite all this I've said, of basically evaluating blacks as individuals and interacting with them on a case-by-case basis, and not being prejudicial toward blacks... you're labelling me as blindly prejudicial to all blacks.
In a parallel example, I've had bad experiences with women I've dated, but that hasn't turned me hostile to all women.
You made the point that you've seen and felt intimidation and discrimination from whites.
I simply made the point that I've had equally real and firsthand incidents of blacks discriminating against myself and other whites.
That's all. Beyond what you deceitfully try to twist it into.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I don't deny that true racism toward blacks occurs, but I think it is far more often a false spectre.
Based on?
Personal observation, and firsthand experience, at work and socially.
And from many incidents I've read about in the media as well. Such as that creepy looking black congresswoman, who was stopped by Capitol Hill security when she didn't wear her I.D. badge, for example.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Have I ignored it? Or have I acknowledged that it does exist, but that the divisive attitude and ideology that is indoctrinated into a large percentage of the American black community, is as big a problem as incidents of true racism against blacks?
You continue to allude to the idea that blacks should get over it, stop feeling like victims, and move on so that America can move forward and we can stop being alienated. However, nowhere in any of these posts have you said that whites have to do anything. If you have, correct me with a link.
I think whites conceded quite a bit, with integrated schools and workplaces, and in declining scholastic standards and test scores, since integration began. I think I voice the opinion of many whites, that no matter what is conceded, blacks respond with hostility, and never feel it's enough.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I think that's clear enough. The indoctrinated victim mentality and hysterical cries of racism at every turn, are the cause of black alienation. And open-minded whites who are sympathetic to true racism, get tired of dealing with the hostility, to the point that we at times would rather avoid interacting with blacks, when we pick up the vibe of what their attitude toward whites is.
The open-minded whites?
Is that...supposed to include you?
You just said cops are right to look at black suspects more closely. You refute information that opposes your view as "liberal spin". But you're one of the open-minded white people who we should cater our mentalities and actions to?
To you?
No.
I'm more open minded than you give me credit for, and if I come across as abrasive here, it's because of your mocking condescension, and deliberate misrepresentation of my views, trying to label me as a racist, for simply giving both statistical facts and honest straightforward opinion, in an open discussion of racial tensions in the U.S.
I interact and socialize with blacks, I've even dated a black woman (as I said, a Jamaican lady, who surprisingly had a harsher opinion of american black attitudes than I do!)
But... by your account, I'm a racist. Right. Sure. Whatever.
And more than that, pitiable and psychologically damaged. Sure, Jason. You bet.
No character assassination or deliberate misrepresentation on your part, eh? None at all. 
When you stoop to such a personal attack, you've clearly lost the debate.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
I say this from articles I've read, as well as my own experience working with black co-workers.
Some jobs I work with blacks, and we get along and socialize, both at work and outside the office.
Others, where I get the clear signals of hostility, I remain friendly, but avoid interaction.
My experience with blacks on this issue is more 50/50 ratio of hostile mindset toward whites. Sometimes more hostile, sometimes less. Usually the more educated the environment (such as working for a healthcare company, with black nurses), the more friendly and less race-separated. The less educated (such as an insurance company mailroom, or an auto rental company) the more divided black and white are.
White. Hot. Fear.
I pity you. You're a victim of your own self-perpetuating paranoia.
See above, particularly about character assassination and deliberately misrepresenting me.
If I interact with blacks 50% or so of the time, when I don't get the "white people are the enemy" vibe, that means I'm friendly and socializing with with the percentage of black Americans who are open to white America.
And that I'm not afraid of blacks, just that I choose not to waste my time with the fucked up ones.
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
Wonder Boy, you are using some sort of strange "Anti - logic" which I cannot comprehend.
I wish you could see this. That is all that I have to say on this subject. Others have already spoken very succinctly here, and any arguments I can muster would only be repeating what has already been said.
And, yeah, this is coming from me, a person who normally is very neutral in this forum, sorta like a one man Switzerland.
Beardguy, I like you, but on this post I disagree with you.
I can't even discern what you mean by "anti-logic". I've been extensively detailed in my responses here, and there's really not much more to say. I'll respond if further asked, but otherwise I've been as clear as can be. And there's already been much repeating of points, on both sides.
My own repeating has largely been in answer to those who didn't read, or chose to ignore or misrepresent, what I posted the first time.
People do not always have to agree to be friends. If we all went around smiling 24/7, and not saying what's really on our minds, we wouldn't be humans - we'd be game show hosts.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Jason E. Perkins didn't quote me. It hurt my feelings.
Honestly, I thought I did.
My posts are so forgettable that you can't even remember quoting them!!!
Oops. Forgot to respond to this post.
My bad.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Karl Hungus could have said:
I think a better representation of a white politician being racist is that guy who said "nigger" on a talk show a few years ago. I forget his name, but he actually spent some time in as a grand wizard in the KKK.
But he's a democrat so its cool with me
Robert Byrd, wikipedia listing
yes that is a better example than joe biden.
technically though, i never said that, G-man rewrote my post to distract from your rather racist remarks and make this a political issue.
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
People do not always have to agree to be friends. If we all went around smiling 24/7, and not saying what's really on our minds, we wouldn't be humans - we'd be game show hosts.
Don't worry about it, beardsy ;P It's over.
My girlfriend recently got into a car accident, as you know. She was t-boned on her side of the car by a green Ford Mustang. She's gotten back on the road and drives by herself now, but whenever she sees a Ford Mustang she gets a sudden feeling of fear. Nothing arresting but enough that she notices the car and avoids it. Don't know that she'll ever get over that.
Humans tend to do this all the time. The tendency to categorize + the need to protect self. It's how we learn to keep our hands off every stove. It's so important that it works beyond the top part of our brain that rationalizes and actually looks at the numbers.
There's nothing you could say or do that would challenge that fear itself. Just let it go. If I can do it, so can you. You're better at that sorta thing.
And don't mind Parys ;P He's not even supposed to be able to read your posts.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
However, if you want a response to the statistics you last gave I'll give it to you in one shot.
In 2000, after the surge in black population in the 90's and long after the numbers you gave in your response were taken, 211 million people reported themselves as "White alone" which accounted for 75% of the U.S. population. Up to 35 million people--12% of the population-reported themselves as "Black only." That's roughly 6:1.
And again, that means that the numbers you gave were all less than they would have been by blind chance were race not involved at all.
I get the basic drift of your point, although it's not 100% clear.
I really am trying to understand and respect your point of view, despite your personal mischaracterizations of me.
As I understand your point to be above, you're saying that the statistical numbers of black and white aren't quite equal to how they identify themselves in racial census.
But I would still argue that the census is accurate, because it represents how individuals themselves, both black and white, identify themselves in the census.
I'll make this clearer since it's important for everyone to understand, though it's obvious I've been misconstrued.
I'm not saying that the census is inaccurate. In fact, I'm using the numbers to support my point.
Again:
Quote:
In 2000, after the surge in black population in the 90's and long after the numbers you gave in your response were taken, 211 million people reported themselves as "White alone" which accounted for 75% of the U.S. population. Up to 35 million people--12% of the population-reported themselves as "Black only." That's roughly 6:1.
That means that in 2000, after a surge in the black population that brought the ratio closer to even than it had been before and after all the statistics given by Wonder Boy, the ratio was still 6 white people to 1 black person.
Now I'm person A. I'm about to commit a violent crime against someone. That 6:1 ratio means that if I picked a random person in 2000, it was 6 times as likely that I chose a white person than that I chose a black person. Again, that's in 2000, when that ratio was closer to 1:1 than in any year the following statistics were taken in.
Okay, so 6 times as likely. So if I choose a white person more than 6 times as much than I choose a black person, that could possibly be called targeting because it's greater than chance. Any less than that would mean that I am choosing white people less than I would if I closed my eyes and randomly shot a bullet in the air.
This isn't based on any spin. This is based on the census which Wonder Boy just argued is accurate and is again based on numbers that give a better chance than in any year before 2000.
So, let's look at his statistics from the other thread that WB posted in response to my assertion with numbers that the 50:1 ratio was bullcrap.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
[LIST]According to the 1999 Index of Leading Cultural Indicators, by William J. Bennett, African Americans, though only 13% of the U.S. population, are responsible for 42 percent of all violent crimes, and over half the murders in the United States.
The statistics on inter-racial crime show an even more shocking pattern of prejudice.
In 1990, Prof. William Wilbanks of the Department of Criminal Justice at Florida International University was angered by a campaign to reduce black-on-black crime, as it seemed to treat assaults on whites as less worthy of condemnation. After an in-depth study of the 1987 Justice Departmentfigures on victims of crime, Wilbanks discovered and reported the following.
In 1987, white criminals chose black victims in 3 percent of violent crimes, while black criminals chose white victims 50 percent of the time.
Okay, black criminals chose white victims 50 percent of the time. That means that black criminals chose victimes who weren't white the other 50 percent.
Well, using the 75% number above (which comes from a census when the white percentage was less), blacks would have chosen whites 25% more often if they were leaving it to blind chance. They would have chosen white more than 75% if there was any targeting involved. But that wasn't the case. Black people chose to victimize someone who WASN'T white more often that we should have if we were ignoring race altogether.
Have I lost anyone?
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
When the crime was rape, white criminals chose black women in 0 percent of their assaults, while black men chose white women in 28 percent of their assaults.
Of 83,000 cases of rape investigated, Wilbanks could not find any in which the rapist was white and the victim was black.
Okay, this is even worse. Black men chose white women only 28 percent of the time. That's 47% less often than random chance and represents a 2.5:1 ratio. That's far below 6:1.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
White criminals chose black victims in 2 percent of their robberies. But black criminals chose white victims in 73 percent of their robberies.
[ This figure alone reflects a money motive to attack whites. Assuming that "Whites have all the money", which I don't really buy. ]
A little better, but still less than chance would allow. 2% less than by BLIND CHANCE. And this is something that should definitely be the result of targeting, given Wonder Boy's "Whites have all the money" scenario concerning black mentality.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
When Professor Wilbanks' startling figures were first reported, there was no refutation, no challenge, no contradiction, simply silence.
Ten years later, in 1999, the Washington Times published the findings of a study on interracial crime by the New Century Foundation. Which relied on the 1994 Justice Department statistics. The NCF study supported Wilbanks' findings.
Blacks had committed 90% of interracial violent crimes in 1994.
As blacks were 12% of the population, these figures meant they were 50 times as likely to commit interracial acts of violence than whites.
.
Blacks were 100 to 250 times more likely than whites to commit interracial gang rapes and gang assaults.
Well, the problem here should be obvious. Statistics like the first specifically fail to split interracial violent crime between black-on-white and black-on-other than white. Beyond assumption we can't really say whether or not black-on-white itself was more or less than the given 75% for chance. And while I'm sure many will assume, that's all they can do.
The others provide comparison. They don't really address the issue of targeting itself, especially of black-on-white. The third, for example. If there was only one act of interracial gang rape or gang assault committed by whites, that would mean that only 250 acts were committed by blacks. We have no idea, though, because the number wasn't given. We learned from another of Wonder Boy's statistics, though, that there was a year where there were 0 occasions of white-on-black rape. That number would have had to have grown considerably to make the number of black-on-white rapes considerable. And we still don't know how many black-on-other than white rapes there were, so we can't say it's less than chance, chance, or targeting.
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Even in the "hate crimes" category --less than 1% of interracial crimes-- blacks were twice as likely to be the assailant as the victim.
Blacks only comprised 12% of the population, so they should have been the victim only 12% of the time. But we don't know the actual number because this statistic fails to give it. Either way, though, 2:1 is far less than 6:1.
Tell me if I lost anyone.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
People do not always have to agree to be friends. If we all went around smiling 24/7, and not saying what's really on our minds, we wouldn't be humans - we'd be game show hosts.
Don't worry about it, beardsy ;P It's over.
My girlfriend recently got into a car accident, as you know. She was t-boned on her side of the car by a green Ford Mustang. She's gotten back on the road and drives by herself now, but whenever she sees a Ford Mustang she gets a sudden feeling of fear. Nothing arresting but enough that she notices the car and avoids it. Don't know that she'll ever get over that.
Humans tend to do this all the time. The tendency to categorize + the need to protect self. It's how we learn to keep our hands off every stove. It's so important that it works beyond the top part of our brain that rationalizes and actually looks at the numbers.
There's nothing you could say or do that would challenge that fear itself. Just let it go. If I can do it, so can you. You're better at that sorta thing.
And don't mind Parys ;P He's not even supposed to be able to read your posts.
Thank you, Jason. I appreciate the kind words. I can understand what you have said about your girlfriend's phobia about Mustangs.. I put that in bold to emphasize your point. You are correct..this is human nature. I have a phobia with dogs, having been chased and bitten by them as a child.
I am not upset at what Pariah said to me, not all! I have not let any negative comments bother me in here for a while now. I no longer react to to insults in here; maybe someone has noticed this....
Wonder Boy's words did not upset me, either. I am disappointed that he said that, but, see the highlighted part of your post above.
Wow this thread got derailed soon...
Just wanted to mention I'm watching 'Roots' on the VCR, have the 6th and final ep. left to watch. It's a very heartbreaking story. Ridicule me all ya want but I can't help getting tears.
You cried during Roots?
Gay.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
You cried during Roots?
Gay.
I cried during Star Trek when Levar Burton stood up bravely and used his VISOR to transmit a signal that saved the day.
I was going to take a break from this topic for a day or two, but I saw this post by G-man to another topic:
Quote:
the G-man said:
Long Beach, CA
A judge Friday sentenced four black teenagers to probation and 60 days of house arrest for their roles in the mob beatings of three white women on Halloween night, evoking tears of joy among the defendants and their relatives and gasps of indignation among the victims' families.
Deputy Dist. Atty. Andrea Bouas had asked for nine months in probation camp for three of the teenagers. Her jaw dropped when Judge Gibson Lee gave the first defendant probation, and as the hearings went on, she choked up, wiping her eyes with tissue.
Despite testimony that their involvement in the beatings varied, Lee handed identical sentences of probation, house arrest and 250 hours of community service to Anthony and Antoinette Ross, twins who turned 18 during the trial; to their 16-year-old sister; and to another 16-year-old described during the trial as Anthony's girlfriend.
[Several of the defendants] were also found to have committed a hate crime during the attack.
The beatings, which took place on a street in Long Beach's well-to-do Bixby Knolls section known for its lavish Halloween displays, roiled the city with allegations of racial hatred and violence. All 10 defendants maintained their innocence throughout the trial.
even as the sentencing was underway, one of the victims, Loren Hyman, was undergoing facial reconstruction surgery to repair the multiple fractures in her nose and around her eye from the beatings.
[Two of the victims] accused the judge and the district attorney's office of buckling to political pressure.
Probation and 60 days house arrest. That'll teach 'em.
I just wonder, how many cases have to be listed before the problem of black violence, and the deeply prevalent ideology in the black community that rationalizes it, is acknowledged as a real problem, and not dismissively swept aside with labels of "White.Hot.Fear." and so forth, on those who voice legitimate concern.
A hundred examples? A thousand? Ten thousand?
The problem exists, whether you choose to acknowledge it or not.
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Humans tend to do this all the time. The tendency to categorize + the need to protect self. It's how we learn to keep our hands off every stove. It's so important that it works beyond the top part of our brain that rationalizes and actually looks at the numbers.
Wonder Boy's words did not upset me, either. I am disappointed that he said that, but, see the highlighted part of your post above.
And while not angry, I was disappointed that you said this, Beardguy. It's akin to namecalling. It annoys me that I backed off, sympathetic to Jason's other more immediate concerns, and yet got a faceful of this.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
You cried during Roots?
Gay.
Keeping Harlem Strong. 
No, seriously, WHY the fuck does G-man still get to frontpage shit?
Rob? Can you give us a straight answer?
Between this and Ragtag Heroes, I'm getting PMs out the wazoo.
That's the anus, if anyone's wondering.
Holden McGroin (sp?) was going to post to this thread, but I ruined it with my liberal smear tactics.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
..I'm getting PMs ...
You forgot to capitalize the "S"
Quote:
Wonder Boy said:
Wonder Boy's words did not upset me, either. I am disappointed that he said that, but, see the highlighted part of your post above.
And while not angry, I was disappointed that you said this, Beardguy. It's akin to namecalling. It annoys me that I backed off, sympathetic to Jason's other more immediate concerns, and yet got a faceful of this.
It was not my intent to annoy, but as you know, I rarely speak up about real issues, and Black History month is a special one for me.
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
It was not my intent to annoy, but as you know, I rarely speak up about real issues, and Black History month is a special one for me.
Because you like black men? 
Seriously, though, what does it take to make the history and/or celebrations of a particular culture "important" to one person or another? Some people would assert that membership in a cultural group is imperative to truly understand it. Others would dismiss the whole thing as a series of meaningless political constructs. Between the two extremes, is it possible to express differing degrees of respect for the observances of various people groups without said respect being preferential or prejudicial?
If I have an issue at all with BHM it would be that the media tends to view too often only in the context of the civil rights movement.
Is that an important component? Of course.
However, blacks have accomplished great things outside the civil rights movement. There have been accomplished black scientists, educators, business leaders, etc., many of whom were accomplishing much prior to the 1960s when such accomplishments were, if anything, more difficult to achieve.
Quote:
the G-man said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
..I'm getting PMs ...
You forgot to capitalize the "S"
You've redeemed yourself.
Very good. I approve.
I feel the love coming back into the forum.
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
It was not my intent to annoy, but as you know, I rarely speak up about real issues, and Black History month is a special one for me.
Because you like black men?
No, Phil. it is much more than that.. I have a longstanding interest in black history, achievements by black people, black culture, black music, etc.
It runs much deeper for me than just merely being attracted to black men.
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
I have a longstanding interest in black history, achievements by black people, black culture, black music, etc.
.....Good fucking grief you are stupid.
Quote:
Pariah said:
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
I have a longstanding interest in black history, achievements by black people, black culture, black music, etc.
.....Good fucking grief you are stupid.
pariah....good fucking grief you are pathetic.
Of course Karl would defend someone who said, "black music."
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Holden McGroin (sp?) was going to post to this thread, but I ruined it with my liberal smear tactics.
But he's made several posts here under his other ID!
Quote:
Im Not Mister Mxypltk said:
But he's made several posts here under his other ID!
Quote:
the G-man said:
Rob Kamphausen?
Gah !
My secret is out !
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
It was not my intent to annoy, but as you know, I rarely speak up about real issues, and Black History month is a special one for me.
Because you like black men?
No, Phil. it is much more than that.. I have a longstanding interest in black history, achievements by black people, black culture, black music, etc.
It runs much deeper for me than just merely being attracted to black men.
Yeah, you didn't touch the rest of my post. I was trying to ask a question of substance, and you replied with pleasantly syrupy Jerryfluff™. I'm happy you have an interest in people and accomplishments and events that are thoroughly inextricable from the cultural identity of America (despite any attempted isolation thereof) as a whole, though.
Happy BHM, everybody.
After reading thru this entire thread, I felt the need to weigh in...something I rarely do in this forum.
My first experiences on the internet, like many of us here at Gob's, were at the old DCMBs back in 2000. I got into a discussion much like this one on the Authority Boards. One of the dedicated participants of that 200 or more page discussion was Dave the Wonder Boy. He and I became fast friends though we didn't exactly see eye to eye on the issue of race in America. While we often disagreed, we were always cordial with one another and really listened to each other's opinions.
Dave, it seems to me that your opinions haven't changed much over the years but, it seems that you are much angrier in expressing them these days. Now, I don't know for sure why this is but, the tone of your posts now is very different from how I remember it back in the day. Perhaps that's due to the overly contentious and partisan nature of this forum. Perhaps you feel victimized for having an unpopular opinion...at least in this particualr thread.
Whatever the case, It seems to me that you are fed up with what you perceive as preferential teatment given to blacks. You seem to feel that most black folks have an unreasonable and unwarranted anger towards whites that manifests itself in violence, a sense of entitlement and a hair-trigger "radar" for peceived racial slights. You've made broad statements and claims backed by spurious "proof" and unsubstantiated anecdotal "evidence" to support your position. Wednesday has refuted much of your statistical evidence and invited you to provide other, less impeachable data and sources.
You haven't.
Instead, you've steadfastly stuck to your old arguements as if you think that by continuing to type them, somehow they'll magically get better and more relevant.
Now, I'm not going back thru this entire thread and quote you post by post. Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could. It seems to me that he's won the debate and perhaps you should offer your own personal experiences and opinions without trying to back certain biases you may have with facts.
For what it's worth, I don't think that you are racist. Nor do I think you "hate" black people as a group. I do think that you allow your general outlook on blacks as a whole be colored by certain negative life experiences you've had as well as your general conservative point of view.
Again, while I don't agree with much of what you say, I think your opinions are valid and you are entitled to think and believe the way you choose. I know quite a few white people of many different backgrounds that see things the way you do. And, I must admit, I know more than a few black people that would seem to prove much of what you say.
But, I have to say, the vast majority of the black people I know are more like me: educated, hard working and not looking for a handout.
Where you see black rage, I see the willingness to speak out against that which is unacceptable. Generations past kept quiet and "knew their place". My generation and the ones that have come after are not willing to accept the status quo of institutionalized racism that even you have admitted is prevelant in this country. I believe that white people are generally afraid of black folks that won't back down and that fear leads you (as a group) to see us as "angry". 50 years ago the word angry could have been replaced by "uppity". Do you get my point?
Where you see a sense of entitlement, I see a demand for a leveling of the playing field that, for decades, has been tipped against us. The reparation debate aside, most black people I know don't want to be given anything other than the chance to excel, the chance to advance, the chance to better ourselves and society at large. Now, to you, this may mean quotas and unfair consideration. To you, this may mean reverse discrimination. The reality is without laws and practices that force consideration and acceptance of black candidates, most places would simply choose to exclude even the most qualified simply on basis of skin color.
AS far as playing the race card goes...admittedly more of that happens than I would like. Especially by our so-called "leaders"; many of whom are nothing more than demagogues and race-baiters themselves. However, I must say, as just a regular old black guy that has been the victim of many incidents of intentional as well as casual racism and bigotry, it can be difficult on occasion to distinguish actual racial animosity from the unintentional slight. I always try to give the benefit of the doubt until a person's true...forgive the pun...colors are revealed.
And that's where I am with you, Dave. You have the benefit of my faith in your character. You and I have been cool over the years. We fall on opposite sides of most social and political debates but, I think you are a genuinely nice guy who is passionate about your beliefs. I have always liked and respected you and found you reasonable to chat with. I don't really recognize this angry, bitter guy that has psoted on this thread under your ID.
The Wonder Boy I knew was better than that.
I greatly appreciate that, T B.
I think that the difference in my tone (if there is) stems from no one calling me demented or pitiable, or whatever, back then, for my views.
We rebutted on the issue, instead of me having to dig myself out of a muddy slime-pit of personal assumptions about my character.
There was some anger in those early discussions, but there were a lot less personal insults, a lot more mutual respect, and a lot more discussion of the actual issue back in those days on the DC boards.
I greatly enjoyed those discussions with you, and regard you as one of the first friends I made online.
It might surprise you to know I wrote down a list of the books you recommended in that first topic, on understanding the black american perspective. At some point, life intervened, and I didn't purchase the books, but I still have the list and intend to. I'm sure they're easier to find now, with Amazon and e-bay.
It's late and I'm tired, I'll respond to your points at more length tomorrow night.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could.
More eloquently, efficiently, and intelligently?
Ha! Reread your post.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could.
More eloquently, efficiently, and intelligently?
Ha! Reread your post.
He's articulate too.
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could.
More eloquently, efficiently, and intelligently?
Ha! Reread your post.
Appreciated.
Play on, playa...
Quote:
thedoctor said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could.
More eloquently, efficiently, and intelligently?
Ha! Reread your post.
He's articulate too.
AND I have an enormous penis.
Don't know if any of you watch {i]Friday Night Lights, but tonight's episode was very interesting and very appropriate to this discussion. In a nutshell, it dealt with casual bigitry and its ramifications. It also dealt with blacks seeing racism where none exists. Got a little of Column A and a little of Column B. Good show.
If any of you are interested, I think you can check it out on NBC.com.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Quote:
thedoctor said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could.
More eloquently, efficiently, and intelligently?
Ha! Reread your post.
He's articulate too.
AND I have an enormous penis.
Quote:
Pig Iron said:
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Quote:
thedoctor said:
Quote:
Jason E. Perkins said:
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could.
More eloquently, efficiently, and intelligently?
Ha! Reread your post.
He's articulate too.
AND I have an enormous penis.
Sorry dude...at least SOME of the stereotypes have to be true... 
Quote:
Captain Sammitch said:
Quote:
Beardguy57 said:
It was not my intent to annoy, but as you know, I rarely speak up about real issues, and Black History month is a special one for me.
Because you like black men?
Seriously, though, what does it take to make the history and/or celebrations of a particular culture "important" to one person or another? Some people would assert that membership in a cultural group is imperative to truly understand it. Others would dismiss the whole thing as a series of meaningless political constructs. Between the two extremes, is it possible to express differing degrees of respect for the observances of various people groups without said respect being preferential or prejudicial?
Now I will attempt to answer your question properly, Phil.
It is quite possible to express differing degrees of respect for the observances of various people groups without said respect being preferential or prejudicial, but many people feel one way or the other to varying degrees.. it's human nature, I expect.
You asked : " Seriously, though, what does it take to make the history and/or celebrations of a particular culture "important" to one person or another?"
Membership would make it important to a certain group to truly understand what it is like to be a member; however, outsiders can be sympathetic enough - and caring enough - to understand this group, yet, only a member of such a group would TRULY understand totally what it is like to be a member.
I will never know what it is like to have department store guards watch me suspiciously because I am a young black man.. or to be arrested and convicted of a crime I did not dcommit, simply because I am black and a few witnesses decided "they all look alike. " I will never know what it is like to have been beaten by police or have high pressure water hoses turned on me during the Civil Rights marches of the 1960's.. but, I do have my own set of bad experiences from which to draw from that enable me to have a slight idea what it is like.. but, only a slight idea.
The ability to relate to a group of people who are different from oneself comes from a desire or interest to do so.
Being sympathetic for whatever reasons can go a long way.
On the other hand, there are people who are fearful, angry, or hateful towards black people. People who so feel this way feel they have good cause, due to extremely negative experiences with a group of people, or because hate for this group of people runs in their family, but it is another thing entirely to act out on that hate. This is what KKK people do. Killing members of a group just because they are different from you is the ultimate extreme expression of negative feelings for a group of people who are different from you.
Grey areas? Sure, there are grey areas... if you ask ten different people how they feel about a certain group of individuals, you will get ten different answers, all varying with the experiences of each individual.
Grey areas can be : indifference, mere tolerance, having feelings but not acting on them, or sometimes, not even being aware of these feelings. People might choose a middle ground due to how they were raised, or their own life experiences with members of a group.. or lack of experiences with members of a group of people.
What it takes to make the history of a group of people important to others not belonging to that particular group?
Curiousity, compassion, empathy for others, a true liking for that group, and an admiration for their culture and religion.
Quote:
Pariah said:
.....Good fucking grief you are stupid.
I'm glad to see the levity posted here in the last 24 hours, and hate to interrupt it with serious discussion.
Frankly, at this point, I'm up for more playful humor.
Jason, your new signature is great, although there were a few other funny ones there to choose from.
But I put off posting at length last night, so...
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Happy BHM, everybody.
After reading thru this entire thread, I felt the need to weigh in...something I rarely do in this forum.
My first experiences on the internet, like many of us here at Gob's, were at the old DCMBs back in 2000. I got into a discussion much like this one on the Authority Boards. One of the dedicated participants of that 200 or more page discussion was Dave the Wonder Boy. He and I became fast friends though we didn't exactly see eye to eye on the issue of race in America. While we often disagreed, we were always cordial with one another and really listened to each other's opinions.
Dave, it seems to me that your opinions haven't changed much over the years but, it seems that you are much angrier in expressing them these days. Now, I don't know for sure why this is but, the tone of your posts now is very different from how I remember it back in the day. Perhaps that's due to the overly contentious and partisan nature of this forum. Perhaps you feel victimized for having an unpopular opinion...at least in this particualr thread.
As I said TB, those were very enjoyable discussions for me as well.
Regarding my being "angrier" now... you did see what I was responding to, correct?
If discussion remained on the issue and did not turn to insulting personal assumptions about me, it never would have come to that. I respond to personal attacks as minimally as possible, but there is a certain amount of obligatory response.
And forgive me for taking personally directed comments personally.
Although I spoke to Jason by PM (private message), and he expressed that he drew that conclusion out of an effort to understand my POV, and says he didn't purposefully try to insult me. So I accept that perhaps it was just miscommunication. But at the point I reacted to it, it certainly came across as very personal and insulting, even if it wasn't intended that way.
Some of my comments express my worn-out patience with the same old trump-card arguments, such as "You can't know what it's like to be black", which is a trump-card I accused Mr. Perkins of pulling a few posts back.
But on rereading (one of his two posts that I haven't responded to yet) I now see that he didn't say that. At least not in this topic. It may have been him or someone else, in a previous topic.
So Jason, I am sorry for that.
But please understand, that's a card I've seen pulled frequently, and I misinterpreted that to be what you were saying.
For much of what I've posted to this topic, I don't apologize. I simply stated my views candidly and honestly about how I see black/white relations.
And I think roughly half the time, we (blacks and whites) get along splendidly, and have a lot of shared experience. But there are clearly areas where our experience diverges.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Whatever the case, It seems to me that you are fed up with what you perceive as preferential treatment given to blacks.
Yes and no.
As I said, I've witnessed real incidents of racism.
And conversely, I've also felt unabashed racist treatment by blacks and other minorities. Often on the job.
But I'm sympathetic to blacks who suffer in real cases of racism. And I'm proud to live in a country that has advanced so far in 40 years.
What annoys me is when blacks project a hostile attitude toward me and other whites, when we haven't paticipated in racism. And I do feel that's over-reaction on their part, and perpetuation of a myth, their assuming that racism is far more prevalent than it truly is.
And I also feel the brow-beating extorting of guilt from whites, over decades-old past racism, is actually creating hostility in whites toward blacks, that otherwise would be forgotten and healed.
And if not anger, then a tired attitude of just not wanting to interact and deal with it.
Another personal anecdotal example from my own experience:
An older black guy stormed into the gas station i was in two years ago. I'd say he was in his early 60's. I was inside paying in advance for my gas (most stations in Florida make you pay first and then pump your gas, because people driving away without paying is a big problem) and he walked in, after the clerk told him over the intercom at the pump he had to come in and pay first. He was screaming at the arab attendant-guy, saying "You make me pay for my gas first?!? This is racism, I'm going to report you to the NAACP..."
Which was kind of funny and sad at the same time, he didn't come in soon enough to see that I had to do the same thing.
So I went outside and pumped my gas, and noticed he was on the other side of the same island, and still visibly agitated.
After I finished pumping my gas, I walked over and as gently as I could said: "Hey, I just want to let you know, most of the stations here make you pump your gas first. I guess it's different where you live." And it segued into a conversation, and his wife got out of the car and he introduced me to her. They were very friendly. I think their license tag was from South Carolina. I liked them both, and got a very different side of him in our conversation than when we first met inside.
Then he asked me directions and said he was here to visit his son, and was a little lost, so I gave him very clear directions three or four miles across major streets, where he needed to go. We said our goodbyes, and he thanked me profusely.
And I think it really put him at ease to see a friendly face at that point. I was glad the way it turned out, it exceeded my greatest expectations.
Another incident happened two weeks ago at a 7-11, next to where I was having my car repaired.
When I walked in to the 7-11, there was a large black lady at the counter, getting a money order, really mouthing off at the two Pakistani clerks at the counter. She finally was given her change and left. The gist of it was, she felt like they were treating her badly/differently/whatever because she was black.
I'd met one of the clerks before, he was kind of impersonal and friendly-resistant, even when I was nice to him in the past.
When I got to the counter, I asked the other, newer younger clerk, "What the heck was THAT all about?!"
The young clerk just nervously didn't say anything, and the older impersonal clerk said: "Just some stupid motherfucker!"
Which kind of made me laugh, because the Pakistanis I've met are usually so much more low-key and respectful, and don't use profanity. It was like if a five-year-old or a priest said "motherfucker". It was funny because it was so unexpected, and also because the lady clearly really pissed him off.
But she assumed he treated her different because she was black. But this guy was just an equal-opportunity asshole, and is equally impersonal and rude to everyone. The other guy was clearly new, and clearly didn't know what the fuck to say.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
You seem to feel that most black folks have an unreasonable and unwarranted anger towards whites that manifests itself in violence, a sense of entitlement and a hair-trigger "radar" for peceived racial slights. You've made broad statements and claims backed by spurious "proof" and unsubstantiated anecdotal "evidence" to support your position.
Maybe I've been unclear, but I think some blacks buy into it, and some don't. Like I said before, crimes are tabulated in quantifiable numbers, but overt or hidden hostility toward whites is hard to tabulate a percentage for.
A poll could show its 30%, 50% or 70% of blacks who feel distrust and hostility toward whites, and I could believe any of those numbers. I could even believe it's only 15% or 20%.
But my point is, you have Charles Rangel, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and hundreds of other liberal leaders, both black and white, who are out there cultivating their political base by perpetuating the you are victims of discrimination who deserve special treatment, special protection, special education quotas, and even reparations.
That message is always out there, and some blacks buy into that ideology (whether it's 15%, 20%, 30%, 50% or 70%), and I see too many stories of blacks who have voiced that rage for whites, and finally attacked a white person, to beleive that this victim ideology isn't the cause of it.
If not from this liberal message of victimhood and entitled compensation, what other place could this hostile rage toward the white community be coming from, so many decades after widepread racism and true black exclusion have been overcome?
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Wednesday has refuted much of your statistical evidence and invited you to provide other, less impeachable data and sources.
You haven't.
The U.S. Justice department has offered numbers of black arrests and conviction rates.
Wendesday has offered some numbers and theories to contest those numbers, some of which I frankly don't understand and doesn't make sense to me.
I'm still open to what he says, pending more clear explanation. But I wouldn't go so far as to say he has "refuted" my statistical evidence.
Wednesday said all those 50-to-1-black-on-white crime statistics were manufactured by some white racist whacko I never heard of, who wrote book on the threat of black crime rate, whose manufactured statistics are endlessly quoted by others and never challenged for accuracy.
That's a theory. That's not proven.
And I think the U.S. Department of Justice would challenge the notion that their numbers are swiped without confirmation from someone well-known to be a white-racist whacko.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Instead, you've steadfastly stuck to your old arguements as if you think that by continuing to type them, somehow they'll magically get better and more relevant.
No. I didn't see a credible argument to refute the numbers of our federal government.
Likewise regarding the U.S. Department of Education's numbers of black dropout rates.
As well as teen pregnancy rates, number of black babies born addicted to crack, etc.
Pending further evidence, I'm not buying.
And again, this is some blacks, far from all or a majority. But an alarming percentage.
It can be argued that more government spending on programs would change these numbers. But others would argue you can't help people who won't help themselves, no matter how much you spend.
And again, I think the problem stems from the poisonous ideology fed to black America, of which some (percentage unknown, again) buy into.
I've seen articles that compare the success rates of blacks in the U.S. who have immigrated from Haiti, the Bahamas, Jamaica and Africa, who have a far higher ratio of career education and career success than the success ratio american blacks.
That would indicate the problem is not racism against blacks, but a problem unique to American black culture, that stifles the success of so many.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Now, I'm not going back thru this entire thread and quote you post by post. Mr. Perkins has done that more eloquently, efficiently and intelligently than I ever could. It seems to me that he's won the debate and perhaps you should offer your own personal experiences and opinions without trying to back certain biases you may have with facts.
Oh sure.
"White.Hot.Fear." and "pitiable" are such convincing reason-based arguments of the core issue.
Yeah, he sure won that debate.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
For what it's worth, I don't think that you are racist. Nor do I think you "hate" black people as a group. I do think that you allow your general outlook on blacks as a whole be colored by certain negative life experiences you've had as well as your general conservative point of view.
I appreciate that you acknowledge I'm not a racist.
But I think you have either not read, or didn't recall at the time you wrote this, what I repeatedly said, which was not a sweeping "general outlook on blacks".
I said: A message is out there aimed at all of black america.
Some blacks reject that message.
Some blacks buy into that message.
A smaller percentage buy into that message so angrily that they lash out violently at white Americans.
And like I said, my attitude toward blacks isn't "colored by certain negative life experiences [I've] had." I'm wide open to other viewpoints if explained to me in terms that make actual sense and don't come across as clear spin and rationalization that justifies irresponsible black attitudes and behavior.
What I've heard so far largely comes across, so far, as rationalization and spin.
And I don't like assumptions that my legitimate concerns about a quantifiable black social problem is dismissable as my alleged irrational fear of blacks because of a few not-so-traumatic interactions with a few black idiots and thugs.
Like I said (and it annoys me a bit to have to repeat all this, because it's like you say I voice legitimate concerns, but simultaneously continue to perpetuate the he-has-irrational-fear-of blacks-due-to-traumatic-past-events-and that-explains-everything angle. Maybe you just forgot or overlooked that part of my previous post?) I've had bad experiences with a fair number of women, but I still keep dating women and enjoy their company, despite a few difficult ones in my past.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Again, while I don't agree with much of what you say, I think your opinions are valid and you are entitled to think and believe the way you choose. I know quite a few white people of many different backgrounds that see things the way you do. And, I must admit, I know more than a few black people that would seem to prove much of what you say.
Again, thank you, and I appreciate your candor.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
But, I have to say, the vast majority of the black people I know are more like me: educated, hard working and not looking for a handout.
Like I said, there are many blacks I interact with, whose company I enjoy, and with whom I'm very comfortable.
And again, I don't know how to quantify a percentage who have hostility toward whites. It could be a small percentage, or a high percentage, and neither would surprise me. I know it's out there, though I don't sweepingly judge blacks. But when I pick up the "enemy" vibe, I know it, and mostly try to be friendly and work through it. But it's really uncomfortable when you can't.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Where you see black rage, I see the willingness to speak out against that which is unacceptable.
And while I don't discount true examples of racism, I feel black anger on what has ceased to be a real issue, since 1965 opened universities, opened the work environment, and opened every other organization to black membership.
Barring real examples that can be investigated, I don't see that kind of discrimination happening on a regular basis. And the liberal media hypes to death the isolated case that occurs every few years. Extremely isolated incidents.
But the ideology-driven attacks on whites occur with more frequency.
G-man has posted two violent examples from the last week.
Another I recall happened three years ago at a Pompano mall where I get my hair cut. There's a bus terminal right next to the mall entrance. When I got home from my haircut, I saw on the news that an elderly white guy was stabbed in the neck on the bus by a younger black guy. Police searched the stabber's apartment and talked to his neighbors, revealing he had many conversations and notebooks full of writings about his anger about white oppression, and how whites had to pay for it.
So he stabbed some defenseless old man.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Generations past kept quiet and "knew their place". My generation and the ones that have come after are not willing to accept the status quo of institutionalized racism that even you have admitted is prevelant in this country. I believe that white people are generally afraid of black folks that won't back down and that fear leads you (as a group) to see us as "angry". 50 years ago the word angry could have been replaced by "uppity". Do you get my point?
White people are generally afraid of blacks who are uneducated, have no visible means of earning a living, and who dress and behave in a criminal and threatening manner.
Blacks who don't fit this profile are not feared by whites. They are welcomed.
And people (black or white, or whatever race) who walk around saying they're not going to take any crap, are people looking for a fight, and people I don't want to deal with.
Again and again I've made this point: It's warped ideology, not racial blackness, that causes many blacks problems with whites.
It's not a matter of race.
There are certain attitudes I find offensive in whites. And what I find offensive in blacks is a cultural variant of the same attitude, which I try to avoid.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
Where you see a sense of entitlement, I see a demand for a leveling of the playing field that, for decades, has been tipped against us. The reparation debate aside, most black people I know don't want to be given anything other than the chance to excel, the chance to advance, the chance to better ourselves and society at large. Now, to you, this may mean quotas and unfair consideration. To you, this may mean reverse discrimination. The reality is without laws and practices that force consideration and acceptance of black candidates, most places would simply choose to exclude even the most qualified simply on basis of skin color.
In many cases, I might surprise you and agree with you, that a period of quotas helps to even the scales, and allow blacks to enter professional fields.
But I think it's been 40 years now, and we're nearing the end of that being necessary, maybe another 10 or 20 years at most. And I think only when the crutches have been cast aside will blacks be fully respected as equals. I think without quotas, blacks are regarded right now by all except the truly racist as equals. But quotas generate a percieved inferiority, and accompanying resentment.
Again, I think it is when blacks project a certain attitude of entitlement, or simply speak unprofessionally or are otherwise uneducated, that they become undesireable to employers. Otherwise employers would eagerly hire them. So again, it is personal factors, and not skin color, that is the true problem.
It deeply disturbs me that blacks over the last two decades have isolated themselves in a separate black subculture, with separate music, separate news programs, tv shows, etc. What Patrick Buchanan has termed the Balkanization of America. This is a cultural rift, and not a racial one.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
AS far as playing the race card goes...admittedly more of that happens than I would like. Especially by our so-called "leaders"; many of whom are nothing more than demagogues and race-baiters themselves.
Yes.
Jason Perkins/Wednesday seems to think calls for reparations to blacks is some very obscure outer-fringe movement .
But Jesse Jackson is one of the biggest proponents of it.
And I'd say Jackson is very prominent and mainstream. Or at least visible to the mainstream, and seems to speak for a lot of blacks, even if he is on the liberal fringe. And you might recall, it seemed a real possibility in 1988 that he might get the Democratic nomination over Dukakis. That's pretty mainstream.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
However, I must say, as just a regular old black guy that has been the victim of many incidents of intentional as well as casual racism and bigotry, it can be difficult on occasion to distinguish actual racial animosity from the unintentional slight. I always try to give the benefit of the doubt until a person's true...forgive the pun...colors are revealed.
This is one of your points that I'm the most sympathetic to.
Quote:
THE Bastard said:
And that's where I am with you, Dave. You have the benefit of my faith in your character. You and I have been cool over the years. We fall on opposite sides of most social and political debates but, I think you are a genuinely nice guy who is passionate about your beliefs. I have always liked and respected you and found you reasonable to chat with. I don't really recognize this angry, bitter guy that has posted on this thread under your ID.
The Wonder Boy I knew was better than that.
Well, I appreciate the kind words, and at least weigh the validity of your harsher words, and points I disagree with.
I don't think I've been that angry, except in response to anger directed at me. If I came across as angry, I hope you hold equal scorn for what I was responding to.
And you did see that I opened with a playful paraphrase of Senator Biden's faux pas ?
I don't think I'm all that angry, I do make a playful remark here and there, and not at anyone's expense.
But I do reserve the right to respond in kind to unfair assumptions and characterizations.
Wondy, you should watch out, or Bastie's boiling black rage might give you a nasty burn.
Golly gee! This thread is so old I posted in it.
Also, I was really angry back then.
Also, I still have that avatar.
Also, Y'ALLS RACIST!!
just sayin'.
Also, I was really angry back then.
Did you get that Micheal Jackson makeover?
Golly gee! This thread is so old I posted in it.
Nice to have you back, Jason.
Hope you post more often.
[quote=Jason E. Perkins]
Did you get that Micheal Jackson makeover?
nope. I just found a place with a little more...diversity.
speaking of black history month, this website needs a mobile version.
RAGTAG HEROES, COMING SOON?
FUCK YE--ahhh, prolly not
.
I'm 'bout ready to write that damn thing myself!
[quote=Jason E. Perkins]
Did you get that Micheal Jackson makeover?
nope. I just found a place with a little more...diversity.
speaking of black history month, this website needs a mobile version.
This board is held together with chewing gum and duct tape as it is.
Check your PMs.
It wouldn't be so bad if people would just help me with my rkmbs campaign!
Just a few points of relevance to the whole racism/slavery obsession of black history.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abolition_of_slavery_timeline http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serfdom#Dates_of_emancipation_from_serfdom_in_various_countrieshttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Slavery1) Neither slavery in general, or black slavery in particular, are unique to the Europeans who liberals love to heap all blame onto for black slavery.
The black slave trade was begun by black kingdoms in Africa long before Europeans were involved. They moved slaves to coastal areas where at some point Europeans began purchasing them and shipping them to the Americas.
But Europeans were only involved in the slave trade on a large basis for about 200 years, and by the late 1700's/early 1800's most European powers and the U.S. northern states had abolished slavery (most of the New England states had abolished slavery in the 1780's before the U.S. was fully formed as a nation).
It was black Africans who began the trade, black Africans who sold them at all times to the Europeans, and Europeans never ventured into Africa beyond the coast in pursuit of slaves.
And it was black Africans who continued the trade for hundreds of years, long after Europeans were completely out of the business.
2) As is sourced in the above-linked dates for various nations worldwide that passed laws abolishing slavery, the serfdom, slavery and indentured servitude of whites/Europeans occured roughly when abolition of black slavery occurred, at most a few decades prior. and really, the only notable exception to that was the Confederate South, who paid a devastating price for clinging to black slavery.
3) the U.S. Constitution even allows for indentured servitude of whites, and actually included clauses that guaranteed a later question of the constitutionality of slavery at some point. So arguably, for those who like to bash our founders as white slave owners, most after the 1780's were not slave owners, and others paved the way in their actions for the complete abolition of slavery.
Indentured servitude only faded in the decades prior to the civil war, roughly when black slavery faded.
All of which undermines the whole "white privelege" argument that slavery was some unique burden only suffered by blacks.
I say all this to dispell the myth that is perpetuated in black culture, in movies and tv entertainment, in music videos, and on and on. It disturbs me how black Americans wallow in past racism, and with hostility form their own separate America and subculture, and with "Black History Month", their own separate history and heroes, that galvanizes a perpetual resentment of white America.
Are our experiences really that far apart and different? Or is it just convenient for scapegoating's sake, to create an image of whitey --past or present-- having it so much better?
I always wondered if Bastard harbors any resentment toward Africans for their part in pioneering slavery and exporting slaves.
I wonder if Africans have black guilt for their part in the slave trade?
Wonder Boy said:
I guess it's also not a statement of any significance that every "Martin Luther King Jr. Boulevard" in America, far from being a center of peace, is a center of crime, drugs and violence.
Karl Hungus said:
it's not a statement of any significance. Do you have any statistical evidence? Do you have racial breakdowns of the neighborhoods? Do you have (more important than race in determining crime rates) economic breakdowns of the neighborhoods?
Or is this just some generalization
I don't know if WB is correct, but the generalization of which he speaks is not an uncommon belief, or even one held exclusively by white people. As the
St. Petersburg Times noted:
- most everyone agrees that the image of King Street, U.S.A., is largely of a destitute, crime-ridden area. It's a stigma comedian Chris Rock uses in his standup routine.
It goes like this: Rock says a white friend called him for directions. The man said he was calling from King Street.
"Run!" Rock tells him.
"I don't care where you live in America," Rock says, "if you're on Martin Luther King Boulevard, there's some violence going on."
That perception of the nation's 680 King streets too often matches reality, says Jerry Kolo, a professor at Florida Atlantic University. Once intended as a symbol of equality, the roads have become the dividing line between black and white America.
I'd say they're a dividing line between black America and black America too.
As
90% of the murders are black-on-black.
As is a majority of
other black crime.
Michelle Obama's shameful chapter in black history:
http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2311As Byron York assessed in a
separate article:
The most profound influence in his life, his wife Michelle, is notoriously less circumspect than her careful husband about where she's coming from. Her college thesis, which Princeton tried to keep under lock and key, testifies to a race-obsessed worldview. She may have refined it, but she's never grown out of it.
After four years at one of America's most esteemed academic institutions, Michelle recoiled at the thought of "further integration and/or assimilation into a white cultural and social structure that will only allow me to remain on the periphery of society; never becoming a full participant." That the sky has been the limit for her, that she has managed to ride the "periphery" from Princeton to Harvard Law School, to one of the country's top law firms, and to a plethora of prestigious institutional positions, has not much altered her perspective. Through the windows of her mansion on Chicago's south side, American society still appears as a caste system.
The United States, she says, is "just downright mean." Never, prior to her husband's presidential run, had she had a reason to feel proud of it, she told a campaign throng. But by last November, with Barack's pursuit of the brass ring catching momentum, she suddenly got plenty proud. And confident: so much so that she was moved to tell MSNBC, "Black America will wake up and get it" -- unite and carry him over the finish line.
It reminds me of
Buchanan's assessment of William Ayers and the radical Left of the 60's generation. That despite living as the wealthiest and most entitled generation in history, managed to convince themselves they were living in an intolerable hell.
Apparently there is no level of conciliation from the mainstream of America that will ever sooth Ms. Obama's rage --or black america's as a whole.
Irony.
The group who most loudly bemoans racism at every turn , is in fact the most racist.
As is the perception of every racial group.
INCLUDING blacks.
MAJORITY OF AMERICANS SEE BLACKS AS MORE RACIST THAN WHITES AND HISPANICSA newly released Rasmussen Report indicates that on average Americans consider black Americans to be more racist than whites and Hispanics.
Ideology seemingly plays a large role in public on this issue. Among conservatives, 49 percent consider blacks to be more racist compared to 27 percent of liberals. Twelve percent of conservatives and 27 percent of liberals say whites are more racist.
The partisan perspective shows a similar trend with 49 percent of Republicans and only 29 percent of Democrats saying blacks are more racist. Thirty-six percent of unaffiliated adults feel this way as well.
Interestingly, the race of the respondent seems to be less important than politics.
Among black poll respondents, 31 percent said blacks are more racist, while 24 percent think whites are more racist and 15 percent say Hispanic Americans show greater racist tendencies. Ten percent of white Americans say whites are more racist, 38 say blacks are and 17 percent say Hispanics.
Overall, 37 percent of Americans feel that black Americans are the most racist among the three ethnic groups, 15 percent feel that whites are and 18 percent think Hispanics are.
These figures are reflective of the current overall attitude of race relations, in which 30 percent of Americans feel that racial rapport is good or excellent rapport, 14 percent think current relations are poor, 29 percent think the current trends indicate improvement and 35 percent see neither progress nor regression. Blacks are more optimistic about the current state of affairs than whites and Hispanics, as are liberals versus conservatives.
I'm not seeing any numbers that show an actual majority WB.
The article clearly said that polling across all racial groups, blacks are perceived as the most racist, even among blacks.
MAJORITY OF AMERICANS SEE BLACKS AS MORE RACIST THAN WHITES AND HISPANICSA newly released Rasmussen Report indicates that on average Americans consider black Americans to be more racist than whites and Hispanics.
Ideology seemingly plays a large role in public on this issue. Among conservatives, 49 percent consider blacks to be more racist compared to 27 percent of liberals. Twelve percent of conservatives and 27 percent of liberals say whites are more racist.
The partisan perspective shows a similar trend with 49 percent of Republicans and only 29 percent of Democrats saying blacks are more racist. Thirty-six percent of unaffiliated adults feel this way as well.
Interestingly, the race of the respondent seems to be less important than politics.
Among black poll respondents, 31 percent said blacks are more racist, while 24 percent think whites are more racist and 15 percent say Hispanic Americans show greater racist tendencies. Ten percent of white Americans say whites are more racist, 38 say blacks are and 17 percent say Hispanics.
Overall, 37 percent of Americans feel that black Americans are the most racist among the three ethnic groups, 15 percent feel that whites are and 18 percent think Hispanics are.
These figures are reflective of the current overall attitude of race relations, in which 30 percent of Americans feel that racial rapport is good or excellent rapport, 14 percent think current relations are poor, 29 percent think the current trends indicate improvement and 35 percent see neither progress nor regression. Blacks are more optimistic about the current state of affairs than whites and Hispanics, as are liberals versus conservatives.
Also interesting, on white/Hispanic perceptions:
Americans view Mexicans well; reverse not trueMexicans see Americans as racist, dishonest and exploitative, while Americans see Mexicans as hardworking and think they are more tolerant than Americans.
A new survey of attitudes the two countries hold toward each other showed the border is more than a geographic divide, but also a fissure in public opinions of the two nations and what their citizens think of each other.
The poll, taken by New York-based Zogby International and the Centro de Investigacion para el Desarrollo AC in Mexico City, found that 62 percent of Mexicans surveyed said the United States is more wealthy than Mexico because “it exploits others’ wealth.” Only 22 percent said it was because the United States is “a free country where people have plenty of opportunity to work.”
Among Americans, 78 percent saw Mexicans as hardworking, and 44 percent saw them as tolerant. Among Mexicans, just 26 percent saw Americans as hardworking, 16 percent saw them as honest and 73 percent said Americans are racist.
“Mexicans think Americans are neither hard workers nor honest,” the report’s authors wrote. “They see them as racist, intolerant and moderately law-abiding.”
The study comes as Congress is debating how to increase immigration enforcement and whether to create a guest-worker program that would allow new foreign workers and current illegal aliens — a majority of whom are Mexican nationals — to apply.
President Bush yesterday called for a “civil” debate, saying the nation has “been through these periods before where the immigration debate can get harsh.”
“And it should not be harsh,” he added.
He repeated his pledge that those who take part in his proposed guest-worker program should not be allowed to join the line for citizenship out of order, but he conceded there’s a question of “what about the person who’s been here since 1987.” He did not answer that question.
The House last year passed an immigration-enforcement bill that calls for building nearly 700 miles of fence on the U.S.-Mexico border, but the new poll says that’s unpopular among both Americans and Mexicans. Fully 90 percent of Mexicans oppose a wall, as do 69 percent of Americans.
Still, the poll found that 62 percent of Americans want their member of Congress to support “more restrictive” immigration laws, while 30 percent support “more open” laws.
While 84 percent of Americans had a favorable opinion of Mexicans, just 27 percent have a favorable opinion of the Mexican government. By contrast, just 36 percent of Mexicans have a favorable opinion of Americans.
And yet nearly half of the Mexicans surveyed said crossing the border and working illegally in the United States would improve their lives — 45 percent said yes, while 47 percent said no.
The U.S. portion of the poll included 1,010 persons; the Mexican portion surveyed 1,000. The U.S. margin of error was 3.2 percentage points; the Mexican margin was 3.1 percentage points.
The "evil white racists" again don't fit the stereotype.
The article clearly said that polling across all racial groups, blacks are perceived as the most racist, even among blacks.
....
But a majority would mean over 50 percent correct? The group that comes the closest doesn't even break that 50 percent number.
Btw not sure what this has to do with black history month.
Regardless, you obviously know what it says: that for all the bemoaning of racism toward blacks, it is ironically the highest percentage --across all racial groups listed-- who see blacks as the most prejudiced toward other groups.
Including black opinion of blacks.
It has to do with black history month, because black America is deeply ingrained in a sense of historic and ongoing victimhood. I frankly feel "black history month" is an excuse for the Left to annually stoke black America into hatred of white America, or even just plain hating America. It is the Leftist narrative that America is an unfair place that tries to explain why black America is eternally at the bottom, while blacks who immigrate here from other countries pursue education and career at a higher ratio and move up in society.
Unfortunately, their children become African American, and become indoctrinated in the culture that rifts black Americans from the rest of the country.
My point is that they are arguably disadvantaged by their own mindset and prejudices, that THEY rift THEMSELVES to a large degree from the rest of America. As a result of liberal indoctrination in a sense of eternal victimhood, and ethnocentric grudge against the rest of America.