New Game From The Hood - "Knockdown"
Mr. White male/female, LOOK OUT. Black teens (Eric Holder's people) have invented a new game. It's called the 'Knockdown Punch.' It works like this:
A group of black teens (3 to 15) decide they gonna have some fun. One black male has a recording device (he gonna sell the beat-down in the hood). Then they select another black male - one who wanna show he got manhood - and he gonna slam a sucker punch into the face of an unsuspecting white male or female. The objective ? to show his clique he a man. But ! the white guy/gal gotta hit the ground with the first punch. Otherwise, you a wuss.
More heads up here. The sucker punch does NOT end the game. It's just the beginning. Once the white person is down, the other black males will rush in and then the stomping and head kicking will start. And the objective of this part of the neat-o game? To kill you. After you comatose, yor pockets/purse will be rifled thru looking for valuables.
So, Mr. White male/female. if you hear a black male say , "Yo man. You got a cigarette?" You are likely moments away from a sucker punch to the face. Then infamous beat-down. BEWARE
----
These links are all RECENT white victims (of black hate & racism)
St. Louis --- white male Knockdown
http://www.truecrimereport.com/2011/11/ … t_game.php
Chicago - white female sucker punched -coma
http://blogs.chicagotribune.com/news_co … /king.html
Champaign, Ill -- day after day of attacks on white people
http://www.news-gazette.com/news/courts … bile=false
Florida - white female slammed to the ground. White guys do NOTHING. Hispanic male bravely confronts black sucker puncher
http://www.cagepotato.com/video-asshole … er-huerta/
Philly Sucker Punch - Beat-up "jus for kicks" (i.e. kill some white dude)
http://abclocal.go.com/wpvi/story?secti … id=6043617
Philly - 'The White Geezer Beat-Down Contest'
http://articles.philly.com/2011-10-20/n … ers-ground
Seattle - white beat-down
http://www.komonews.com/news/local/126862698.html
Spokane - "I hate all you white boys"
http://www.amren.com/mtnews/archives/20 … d_beca.php
Sacramento -- beat-down (disabled white lady)
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/10/ … trip-mall/
New Orleans -- beat-down (off-duty police offer attacked - murdered)
http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/201 … ant_f.html
Milwaukee --beat-down
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/125027704.html
New London, Ct -- beat- down (murder)
http://www.theday.com/article/20101130/NWS04/101139989
Louisville, Ky
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BmpOHtwL … re=relmfuY
S. Carolina
http://www.carolinalive.com/news/story. … kbZZdTaEmY
S. Carolina
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … udent.html
Columbia, MO
http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/201 … s-outlook/
Black girl beat-down - white victim (not for the squeamish)
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=ec0_1303444048
Lehigh University, PA -- white females were these brave black males’ exclusive targets
http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/bethleh … _memb.html
Variations of the beat-down:
In Denver, it’s baseball bats. 32 blacks arrested for filming beat-downs
http://www.denverpost.com/frontpage/ci_13843272
SOCORRO, TX - RAPE the Elderly White Male - 70-year-old white male gang raped
http://www.kfoxtv.com/news/news/elderly … rro/nFT9K/
If you want more, I've got more. All this from Eric Holder's people --the most victimized people on planet earth.Wow. What planet am I living on. Thanks for the heads up. Seriously.
<TOS violating photo snipped>
French tourist get the black male beat down in England....
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … -ring.html
ANOTHER upload to WorldHipHop site. Apparently, this 'black' site is the favorite dumping ground for the white person knockdown punch / beat-down. After the beatdown, the white kid's Nike tennis shoes are taken from him.
http://boston.cbslocal.com/2011/12/06/d … es-online/So, it's really rife in the US then!
How come the example is from a UK paper then and one where the victim only believes that his attackers were black?
Have you ever been in a "hood"? You may get beat and robbed but it has nothing to do with race, skin color etc.....
Everyone qualifies as a victim and the perpetrators come in all shapes sizes and colors.
I have a good idea for you. Stay out of the Hood!
I have lived most of my life on the streets and NEVER heard of anything like this occurring. I agree it is a racist stereotype thread. Disgusting!Hey Reality, You say you never heard of this happening? It's in all major cities. what streets to you live on/ In Montana? Wyoming?
6 links were (i just checked the links and Hub administrator CHANGED the links so .so you got to google to find the events!) were "contests". All others were gang attacks. Beatdowns, sucker punch to the head. I am REALLY mad about this!
Ok Reality dude, tell me this, how many attacks by black males against white people IN ONE YEAR PERIOD would convince you that blacks are specifically targeting white people for violence? Census says there are 18 million black males in America , 6 million (approximately) between 16 and 34. How many acts of violence by this 6 million against whites IN ONE~ YEAR would convince you? 10,000, 20,000, 50,0000?Just curious.I live in between the Boston/Providence area since early spring. Never heard of such a thing. I have heard of muggings but not some game?
I have only met a few actual out of the closet racists in my life. I stay as far away from them as possible. These "racists" came in all colors.
Whites hating other whites and dark skinned hating other dark skinned. Also every combination in between.
I find racism appalling in all forms! I speak up when I hear racist comments as well.Well, well. another Northern New England guy. You guys in your white communities up there sure are a brave lot. I also see you chickened out and didn't answer my question dude.
645,000 interracial acts of violence were reported by the government is 2005. Black males committed 580,000 of the...against white people. As I posted below, the math works out to 1 out of 10 black males will commit an act of violence against a white person PER YEAR.!!! 1 out of 600 for white people.
Like posed to two other"brave"people in this thread (one from New England area ) who don't' think there's a BIG problem here, how much money , from your OWN bank account, are you willing to give to the victims in these knockdown, beatdowns?
Here's ANOTHER sucker punch beatdown...from 2007 ...that I found...and right in your neck of the woods reality. This ain't some brand new game! How much money from your own bank account for this dead victim's family of a black male beatdown?
http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2007/1 … death.html
P.s. I also despise racism. That's why I'm in this thread!
"Eric Holders"s people" you tipped you cards right there ....
He sure did, as he has done many times before.
Hmm...I see he created a rise in the forums, brutality of hatred never ciezes, exactly why i stay out of forums, everyone getting mad at each other. What is the point of forum's when people get each other all pissed off! lol
Hello, HattieMattieMae,
Prior to this, I participated in about two other forums and I did not like those experiences for the reasons you stated.
However, I fell into this one because the subject matter intrigued me, but now I realize that was a mistake. About the only thing that has come out of this for me is I have missed some Lifetime movies and Law & Order reruns. ;-)Personally Sir, I've enjoyed many of your comments in this forum, and agreed to much of your perspective.
For what it's worth - I've benefited from your comments here, and I'm reasonably certain that I'm not the only one who has.Why, thank you very much, Wesman. You have made my day. Really.
yay, I learned 10 months ago when I started hubpages, these people are cut throat and nasty more than want to learn, grow, or share! That is why I refuse to come in here most of the time. If you want to be part of an emotional war against another human being this is the place to be! lol
This time, I think I have really learned my lesson.
No more of this for me. I will stick with writing hubs, reading hubs by others, hub hopping, asking questions and answering questions.
In the event I go back on my word and decide to participate in another forum, it will be one about something like The Reason Why I Love Petunias. ;-)Yay! we tend to be nicer people outside of the forums! lol
Man, it's you petunia lovers that are destroying this country.
I stomp on petunias.Pycunix, the above comment is one of the first things I read on HubPages this morning and it really did make me laugh and brought a broad grin to my face.
So, let's get in on. Let us switch gears in this thread and kick off a petunia-lovers vs. petunia-haters conflict. ;-)I truly am not a fan. My wife buys them every year and we plant them, but they seldom turn out well. They are too fussy: there is a narrow band between too little and too much water where they respond best. If everything works out well, they are pretty, but every time I see them my mood turns just a tiny bit negative.
Naw!!!! There's moderation here - if you want brutal - join a Facebook group.
I can't agree that this was a nasty thread. His ideas were attacked, but he wasn't.
The Poster?
I do wonder about the poster's bias.
However, I'm certain that there is something to ....the mass media ignoring any and everything that they choose to ignore.
I do not wish to "stir the pot" here....and I've worked for YEARS at a time in all black and very poor neighborhoods in Dallas for the Dallas Public Schools...with absolutely no problems to speak of, and my shaven head, and "nazi appearance."
Of course you already know that I do air conditioning - hair just ain't productive for someone who crawls in attics, or spends huge amounts of time in the sunshine in Texas Summer's - thus the shaved head...can't much help what I look like.
But do you recall "Beat Whitey Night?" - the media blacked that one out, and the police officer that tried to make it a "hate crime" was disciplined for that.....
So I can't trust the media, and never ever will - for thousands of reasons.
But I'm not convinced by the poster's ...stance, or with his....."facts."
Out of curiosity, I am going to look into some of those brutal Facebook groups.
FB groups can be brutal it is true. Free speech, aaah what a calamity...
I am in a dozen Juggalo groups, we hold "nothing " back. We must still operate within FB's TOS, no porn, threats etc... but speech is allowed!Hello, Reality Bytes,
I am going to look into the Juggalo groups, too.Be careful the Juggalos were just labeled as a gang by the FBI. We support each other, accept each other, have no organization, but still cuz some young thugs commit crimes and claim to be Juggalos, the rest of us are persecuted!
I have to ask so as to be sure, we are talking about "the Insane Clown Posse," right?
This is a highly racist thread and you are promoting a racist agenda that appeals to stereotyping in a horrible way. I've just gone through 8 or 9 of your links, and none of them match what your original thread says they all point to in any way whatever.
YOU are relying on people being too lazy to look, counting on ignorance in what seems to me nothing more than a flagrant desire to create hate, promote racism and perpetrate a highly immoral act. I certainly hope HP comes down on you like a vicious boom.Shadesbreath, specifically which link(s )misrepresents?
"I certainly hope HP comes down on you like a vicious boom."
Yes, HOW DARE I break the un-written rule ... and inform people of black racism / hate in America.Dude, like every one I looked at. Like, the 2nd, 4th, 5th, 9th, 14th, 17th, even the one you added by itself "ANOTHER one" post two posts up.
This is wrong on so many levels. You should be ashamed.I hate to give a cliché here, but IMAGINE if all the victims above where black and the perps white?! Would Shadesbreath post what she did?
Like #2
This one involves two black males and “Yo man. You got a cigarette?” line. The knockdown punch.
Like#4
I posted this one to show how comfortable black males are today to simply walk up to a white female, who is among a group of white males, and slam her in the head with a sucker punch. WOW. I do find it curious that the whole event was filmed. Don’t you? From even before he strikes her… In other words, the person doing the filminng had to know exactly what the black male was going to do. Staged knockdown? Probably. AGAIN, blacks sell these videos in the hood.
Like #5
“16-year-old Kinta Stanton allegedly tells police that he and his friends went out randomly looking for somebody to beat up just for kicks.”
I have researched black criminal behavior long enough to see thru political correct mainstream media descriptions. This was in fact a hunt for a white victim. Result? MURDER
Like 17th
This was a girl beat down. It’s just NOT happenchance that these events are filmed! I’ve seen so many of them.
The one I just posted today was an event two days ago that was CLEARLY set up to be filmed and then uploaded to the mentioned hiphop site.
All the links I’ve included (a tiny portion of my vast collection) represent a pattern of racism and hateful violence …coming from a people who continue to point their finger at white America and claim they're the racist ones.
More than 90% of ALL cross-racial violence come from Eric Holder's people...and their victims are white.Yes, I would post what I did in that IMAGINED scenario. Beyond the obvious issues I have with mindless bigotry, my problem with what you are posting is that you are presenting videos that do NOT match the conclusion you are drawing from them. Had you done the same thing in reverse, I would still have called out your fallacious arguments (as I am wont to do on here regularly--I hate sophistry, deception and lies). And that's what this post is: Your entire point is not in any way reflected in the "evidence" you are giving for it. The threat you suggest is IMAGINED in all but the singular case of the first link. Your point is completely imagined.
If I get 10 videos that show dogs getting hit by cars and then post "Automobiles in America now possessed by dog-hating demon spirits," the videos don't prove the dog-hating demon spirits. They only prove that dogs are getting hit by cars. The rest is me filling the blanks.
What makes your post so deplorable is that in most of these links, in the article that follows (where there is one), it says exactly what the crime ACTUALLY was, for example, one of them was a fight over shoes, another one was part of an ongoing brawl, several were robberies like happen every day, etc. YOU are the one projecting that first article onto the rest.
You are IMAGINING this, and trying to get other people to IMAGINE it with you. That is called fear-mongering; it is disgusting; and it is the sort of behavior history's most vile episodes are founded on. So, congrats on echoing the worst of humanity here."I hate to give a cliché here, but IMAGINE if all the victims above where black and the perps white?! "
Well, let's imagine that for awhile.
Let's imagine that a couple random white guys just beat up on a black guy out of the blue and put him in the hospital.
Chances are, the guys who did the beating would never be found, and if they were, they might not even be charged, because the prosecutor wouldn't want to go to trial without a whole lot of evidence (white guys don't get convicted of violent crimes as easily as black guys do).
If they do go to trial, they'll probably get a comparatively light sentence and get off with probation.
"What makes your post so deplorable is that in most of these links, in the article that follows (where there is one), it says exactly what the crime ACTUALLY was, for example, one of them was a fight over shoes, another one was part of an ongoing brawl, several were robberies like happen every day, etc."
Also, many of the articles don't even mention the race of the victim: in many cases, S Laretseh is just assuming that the victims were white, and projecting racism onto the assailants.
Fearmongering indeed.Leretseh , I got to say, you got balls king kong size to post this. Everyone knows blacks get a free ride on their racism. But also, I checked all your links, you do got two links that don't work.
S outh Carolina one is a bad link.
The last link about the 70-year-old gang rape, that looks I checked and it seems it may be a Mexican-America. Though they can look white.
The New Orleans beatdown looks like a group of blacks attacked whites. Naturally, the politically correct media makes it sound like it was a fair fight. Yeh,ok. sure thing. Argument between whites and blacks. Not a chance! The black male who was arrested for sucker punching the white male (the one who died) in the back of the head. That's intent to murder in my book.
All leretseh's links are black attacks ans assaults on white people. That's indisputable. All racists attacks too. You got to be living in a cave if you don't think blacks are going after white people and deliberately.
I posted a while back about me and my friend getting chased by blacks. We were lucky! We just got to the bar in time and inside.
Here's what I found in just a few minutes search (black attakcs on white people).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vF0sHt84 … re=related
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … udent.html
Not saying race of perps her, but they were black C'Mon!
http://www.nbcphiladelphia.com/news/loc … 37844.html
http://abcnews.go.com/US/Media/white-te … uFddEQ50mY
I'm also seeing alot where the white male is dead, then the media tells us that it was an argument and the white guy got the worst of it. Every time? And he just so happens gets punch square in the head and he dies. No way! The black male then get to plead to involuntary manslaughter. Way reduced charge.
Hundreds of these black on white attacks on youtubeABSOLUTE EVIDENCE THAT GRAVITY IS FAILING PROVING GOD IS ABANDONING US AND WE SHOULD HATE AND FEAR:
http://youtu.be/2QA_3o6Mc5U (omg this one is terrifying... look at what's happening. Obvious gravity failure)
http://youtu.be/QccRO3TmVyo Again, total betrayal of rules of gravity as God changes his mind and begins to unravel physics.
More evidence: http://youtu.be/MK6GZ0zXdhw
THIS IS TERRIFYING: http://youtu.be/2K0i4QGfcxo
Just wow, thousands of objects just fall off the earth here: http://youtu.be/kyLyGKZqp3c
These are just a fraction of the videos I have proving that God has abandoned us and begun canceling gravity. Clearly you see the need for fear and hatred of God for his betrayal. The evidence is right before your eyes. The time to hate hate hate is NOW.All my links were changed by Hub administrator. Holy MOLLY)
Shadesbreath, You're response is really weird! DUMB!
I had to google for the 32 black males who were arrested filing sucker punches and beatdowns on white people. I'm pissed! Altering someones post?! You can google "32 blacks arrested Denver"...
Here's a DIRECT quote from that Denver police gang unit, an 'expert" in gangs: READ DUDE!!!!!!
"As part of the trend, black gang members videotape the assaults in trendy tourist districts and sell them on the underground market as entertainment."
"They knock a young white guy out with one blow to see if his knees will wobble and surround them and take their money," said the Rev. Leon Kelly, who runs a Denver gang-prevention program. "It's a joke.""
Now dude, I am believing you know what the word "trend" means. If you don't GOOGLE IT!
Now you go and call the Denver police dude, and you tell them they are promoting HATE, HATE, HATE...HURRY UP and do it! How dare they!
Here is a famous case of two white thugs murdering a black man in a horrific fashion and paying the penalty.
The incident was used for fear mongering purposes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_James_Byrd,_Jr.
Here is an example of black on white crime where the races of the attackers and the victims were ignored by the politically correct press.
http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2011/08/05/ … tate-fair/
Inter-racial violence is not unusual. The uncomfortable truth is that Blacks are more likely to be victims of Black criminals than White criminals and Whites are more likely to be victims of Black criminals than White criminals. Criminality is not a product of poverty but of personal moral conduct.Here is a famous case of five white thugs murdering a black youth and gettingaway with it, aided by racist police.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Stephen_LawrenceEven crimes committed by police are personal moral choices. Policemen are not angels.
Eh! The murder wasn't committed by the police,it was committed by five white guys.
The police just didn't go out of their way to secure a conviction, even, I believe,going as far as to let some of the suspects destroy evidence.
My point was that white on black violence occurs but is more generally excused by the authorities.Isn't the destruction of evidence or allowing its destruction a crime?
So John, you say whites kill blacks and get away with it. Really, Wow Guess OJ screwed the pooch on that one. Face it, it happens both way, Criminals white or black will commit crimes against whoever they see whether it is white or black. It's just you far right and far left people that want to make more of it than it is. By the way, why is it we do not hear or see the stories when Asians beat down white or blacks, or when Native Americans beat down whites or blacks, even the Latinos get left out of that equation
Why do you all take an honest look at what happens and stop trying to make it into something it is notI rather think that it was the OP who was trying to make it into something it was not!
Actually, in the UK there is much ado about Asian men grooming and sexually assaulting (including rape) young white women. However, in reality, offences against young (under age white women) are typically perpetrated by young white, working class males. This essential ingredient rarely makes it to the mainstream media, however.
Criminality is a huge thing, and each aspect of it will reflect differently...
Such grandiose generalizations undermine the intents of those who put them out.
I don't get it. Most of those states allow concealed carry - why aren't people defending themselves?
There is NO DEFENSE against a sucker punch.
I have searched the Internet extensively looking for ONE example of a white male sucker punching a black person. I have not found one. I also find it more than curious, for those who insist most crimes by blacks are against blacks, why are there no sucker punch videos of black on black? The media doesn't care about the race of the victim, just the event. All the victims are white and the perps are young black males.
Blacks sucker punching white people is going on all over the country...with alarming regularity! If white people don't force this issue to the mainstream, it's going to get worseI'm sure if you looked back into history, say a few hundred years ago, a few whites were suckerpunching blacks, her der. So, it might be best to lay off the "holier than thou" attitude.
What I"m saying is that, if someone punches you, and you are carrying, it's just a matter of standing up and showing your gun, and a countdown from 3 to get them to stop.Who knows if its happening now but this is.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … years.html
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/crime … 87473.html
http://voice-online.co.uk/article/man-f … and-murder
http://www.pe.com/local-news/local-news … ar-old.ece
Would you like more?Using the Daily Mail as evidence is really funny regarding this thread. I'm sure if you were a UK citizen you'd understand why. Still, funny though.
They have been known to completely distort, put it that way.
There arguments are usually very one sided (as with most newspapers) Yes, they lied by omission.
You, want to know, you prove they didn't.
Hows the Telegraph measure up to truthfulness? I proved this scumbag is doing time, you proved you don't like the truth when you don't like the source.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ … sault.html
So, what does that prove?
It ain't white guys beating up on blacks, and no matter how many cases of bad blacks you show me it doesn't prove that whites don't beat up on blacks.I am trying to find US National Statistics on Violent criminals broken down by race, but it REALLY looks like no one wants to study this, or even present the info.
According to the info I can find, however, it does seem that blacks are a bit more violent than whites are in the US. However, I don't fully trust the data I have found - I don't even really want to post it here.
Ugh... I'm going to post it anyway. The citations in the guy's bibliography seem legit. I'll openly admit I haven't checked them all out, but I am seeing FBI statistics cited quite frequently. The guy writing it has been called a white supremacist, but then again, anyone who writes any publication with such a result WOULD be called that.
Once again, I didn't a thorough search of info, but here's the -ugh- best source I could find for "Violent Crime committed by race". http://www.colorofcrime.com/colorofcrime2005.pdf
If anyone has some more trustworthy statistics, I'd love to read them.Try looking at incarceration rates of Blacks to Whites. I know that most of the liberals on here will find a way to excuse the behavior as a result of being poor or some other equally ridiculous cause but thats the best way to determine who is actually committing a majority of the crimes.
No, that's a really effing stupid way to determine who is committing a majority of the crimes.
Why? Because our legal system doesn't work properly.
Compare the conviction rates between black and white defendants, and you'll see that black defendants have a higher conviction rate. Why? Because more black defendants are guilty? In a perfect world, that would be the answer, but look at how many people get exonerated (usually by DNA evidence) after being convicted.
Now consider the difference in sentencing between white convicts and black convicts. For similar crimes to white convicts, black convicts get harsher, longer sentences. Why? Not because black convicts are more violent ('cos the crimes were similar, remember?), but because black defendants get disproportionally harsh sentences.
"Black people have a higher incarceration rate, therefore they must commit more crimes" is as intellectually lazy as "This banana in my ear keeps the polar bears away from my neighborhood: you don't see any polar bears around here, do you?"Yeah, and here comes a liberal with all the answers as to why the black convicts are actually the victims.
"Yeah, and here comes a liberal with all the answers as to why the black convicts are actually the victims."
No, let me try again. I'll try to use small words so you can keep up.
The number of black people in prison isn't enough data to base a conclusion on. You have to look at other factors, because if you don't, you're being lazy.
Lemme give you an example.
Back in the day, there was a bit of a controversy at a high school near where I was going to college. There were a bunch of black students arguing that the school's administration was racist, because more black students were getting expelled than white students. But that's not enough data to make that conclusion.
To be able to make that conclusion (and not get laughed at for sheer stupidity) you need to check a few other things, like overall population (if there's a larger percentage of black students, then you'd expect the difference in expulsion rate to be about the same as the difference in overall population, all other things being equal). You also have to look at how many incidents get reported (if nobody's reporting white students for breaking the rules, then you wouldn't expect many of them to get expelled, would you?
Finally, and this is the important bit, you need to check and see what happens to white students and black students when they commit comparable crimes. If you see white students being given a detention for cutting class, and black students getting expelled for cutting class, then you can argue that there's a racial bias at work.
And that is exactly the kind of problem we have in our judicial system. The bar is lower to convict Black defendants, and they get harsher sentences than convicted whites for comparable crimes.
None of this excuses any actual crimes committed, and your implication that I was giving criminals a pass was trite, predictable, and stupid. I never said anything like that.
What I actually said was that black defendants do not get treated the same as white defendants in American courts, and that it isn't right. If white criminals were convicted at the same rate, and received comparable sentences for comparable crimes, then we'd be okay. But that's not what happens.
In fact, based on your comments, we could make a stronger case for you not caring about crime, as long as it's committed by a white guy. That's what racism looks like, mate.White population percentage=72.4%
Black population percentage=12.6%
White prison population=58.6%
Black prison population=37.9%
Lets say half of Black prisoners are unjustly imprisoned. A liberal pipe dream.
Black prison population=18.95%
Still considerably higher than the U.S. population they represent.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/00000.html
http://www.bop.gov/news/quick.jsp#2Once again, this doesn't show ONLY violent crimes.
Selling weed or smoking weed is NOT a REAL crime.
We're only concerning ourselves with REAL crime such as Violence, theft, and property damage; also we're looking at the THREATS of such crime
"Weed is not a crime" Someone needs to go read the law books. It does not matter what your personal opinion is, the fact is weed is a crime, period. Your personal opinions are why you all cannot truly look or agree on black and white crime rates.
Nope, not a crime. Only tyrants would enforce such laws.
Nothing worth considering regarding violence.
Weed is not a crime.
Then go into a police station and light it up and see what happens.
Uh, were you responding to someone else? I never said that "Weed is not a crime."
I think it should be decriminalized, and in fact legalized (we waste too much time, money and other resources on punishing people for selling and using the stuff), but I never claimed that it wasn't illegal.No Jeff.
Evan said it was not a crime. I was just pointing out since he likes to be so perfect and accurate, that indeed weed is a crime. Does not matter what ones personal feelings are, it is against the lawIf the US Constitution is the Law Of The Land - then any supposed "law" that doesn't fall into or under the US Constitution is it'self an illegal non law.
A crime to enforce - such as the "patriot act" or...the prohibition of marijuana.
Incarceration rates also show non-violent offenders. non-violent crimes aren't really crimes.
True, much of it is from minor drug use, possession or distribution.
Sure glad Even the magnificant has pointed out to us all that non-violent crimes really are not crimes. Wish the judges I faces as a kid thought that way
The high black incarceration rate results in large part from convictions for minor drug possession and use.
Drug use in the white suburbs is similar, but results much less in felony arrests, convictions and prison sentences.
They have a history of lynching them.
http://www.americanlynching.com/pic23.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_i … ted_StatesDon't get me wrong - I just wanted to see the real statistics. That way we can either refuse them the racists, or address the problem.
Would you mind showing me the multitude of white on black crime? I would be glad to show you the exact opposite to that.
You won't be able to, because when a black guy commits a crime against a white guy, he can't count on a legal machine that will let him off with a slap on the wrist, as the white guys who burned crosses, churches, and people could.
The legal machine convicts black defendants at a much higher rate than it does white defendants, and convicted blacks get harsher sentences than convicted whites for similar crimes.Poor, poor criminals. Maybe you should hold their hands and console them. Did it ever occur to you that they are committing crimes at a higher rate than whites? Did it ever occur to you that they commit violent crimes at higher rates than whites?
I don't care about crimes, I only care about violent crimes.
Selling weed isn't a crime, but stealing that weed is.Theft is a violent crime, but smoking weed isn't.
Weed isn't a crime.
I watched/read a random selection of links and videos , your "theory" is not corroborated by your selections.
Although it is true that in some neighborhoods you can easily get jumped and beaten for your skin color - it is not unique to any one race against another.
Your research skills are pitiful if you could not find examples of race based crimes that were the opposite of your theory.
Such videos are made and sold though
http://www.jsonline.com/news/milwaukee/125027704.html
And the account of the "policing" done in this case is quite pitiful and alarmingUm, white people do this too, and black people get attacked. Thugs are thugs regardless of color.
I totally agree. Think about Yusuf Hawkins in Bensonhurst, Brooklyn 22 years ago. He went into Bensonhurst looking for a used car and some youths attacked and killed him. Thugs and hoodlums are what they are regardless of so-called race.
Yusuf Hawkins? Checked on the internet and that was in 1989. C'Mon dude. Here and now. Blacks attacking whites is a very serious problem.
Yes, there is a difference in a poor criminal and a rich criminal. The poor are not console, but you know that huh, Repairguy?
Actually, I have no clue as to what you just said, the poor are not console. WTF does that mean?
So, thugs are thugs. What a revelation.
And there are more black thugs, proportionally, than white thugs. Another profound insight.
Most assaults by blacks are on other blacks in the US. Given that fact, a black person assaulting a white person would be unusual and attention grabbing in its own right.
But nobody would be impressed with a video of a black person assaulting another black person. Supply and demand.
The racist or violent leanings of some random young black men are hardly noteworthy.
Violent crime has been falling for years in this country.
You need to stuff your emotions back in your pants and start dealing in statistics and data if you want to say anything meaningful.
And making some friends who have different skin colors probably wouldn't hurt either."You need to stuff your emotions back in your pants and start dealing in statistics and data if you want to say anything meaningful."
Not likely; that would require thought.
"And making some friends who have different skin colors probably wouldn't hurt either."
Also unlikely in someone who seems to be so terrified of people who are different.Right. These are "Eric Holder's people" after all. (Hahaha... wtf does that even mean?)
And for the apologists, there are far,far,far more poor whites than blacks in the U.S. Your theories are just more noise to drown out the truth.
Repairguy, actually you do have a clue, if not here's one, poor poor criminal. I just pointed out the other side of post FYI. Here is another side, there is more white collar crime than black collar crime in America.. White collar crime pays and black collar crimes is prosecuted, Do you understand me now, fellow American?
I knew you had a clue, yes you're right and there are more poor whites on welfare and food stamps than poor blacks. You must know the white collar criminals victimise all races of American.
Mr. Deeds. I think what you did is REALLY pathetic. You are trying to stifle a discussion here where white people are getting seriously injured and murdered in racist attacks by blacks.
The pic you posted is a guy by the name of George Meadows, justifiable hung - lynched - in 1889. I did some looking into this HUMAN PIECE OF GARBAGE. I would have gladly participated in his hanging...legal or lynching!
Here is this dirt bags crimes:
* raped and murdered a white women (Pratt Minor)
* raped a "little" negro girl (age unknown but looks like under 10)
* was suspected of "several" other rapes in the "vicinity."
Meadows epithet read : Murderer And RapistI was ready to move on since this thread was so sick and pointless.
Crimes committed by young people of all colors are getting worse these days because of the poverty of some, the fear and anger of most, and the overwhelming hopeless and helpless feelings all of our children face every day. On top of all that; you now have video phones and YouTube and the potential to make every nobody a star! (I know I'm going to be a famous writer some day because I write on Hubpages)
Now back to my point. For someone to get on this forum and justify lynchings makes me speechless. I'm a guy that always has something to say, even if it gets me banned from Hubpages. But, it's obvious to me now, that hubpages will allow any vile belly crawler on to this site! I thought there were some standards of behavior applied to people that called themselves writers here on Hubpages.oh holy molly friendly. I would not support any lynching today. The year of the lynching pic was 1889! It was done. It was done rather frequently. If you're a guy you would have been there . If you were'nt the locals would have had bad names to call you. When the Romans did their gladiatorial contests...would you have been in the stands cheering them on? Of course you would. Civilized people did that kind of stuff. Times do change.
For everyone who doesn't think this is any BIG problem at all, I say let's get a person collection of money coming from you brave guys ( and gals) for the victims and those who survived and the dead. There's not that many victimss. How much from your bank accout brave friendly guy? How much?I understand your anger; it's totally justified since you are a victim of a violent crime. I'm the victim of multiple race and hate crimes. I know you want to run and scream and tell the world the sky is falling, and young black men are raining down on us to punch us in the face. It's just not happening. Calm down, go to your window and look out.
What are the multiple race and hate crimes that you have been a victim of?
Are you asking me to justify myself to you in some way? Who are you?
No, I was just curious as to what happened to you, you don't have to tell me. I am me, who are you?
So, an extrajudicial execution and an assertion of guilt are all you need to throw out due process, eh? Or will you only do that if the accused is a black guy?
Pathetic.Are you holding those same standards to Obama? He drone striked a US citizen on the same grounds!
"Are you holding those same standards to Obama? He drone striked a US citizen on the same grounds!"
Absolutely.Sorry Evan, he was not an American citizen, he gave it up two ways. One he took Yemen citicezship so therfore he was no longer an American and he attacked America which made him a trator.
The photo is an example of a widespread practice of whites lynching blacks well into the 20th centure without bothering with a trial before a jury of their peers. I don't believe that attacks by blacks against whites is a significant problem. I live near Detroit and I go where ever I want without fear of being attacked. I'm not saying it never occurs, but that it is quite rare in my experience.
To secularist10: Thank you so much. You have said quite an intelligent mouthful. This forum is totally racist and illogical in its premise. It should be thoroughly removed for its inflammatory and totally atavistic leanings. Do you concur with me on this?
Evan G Rogers, I have a very current link - by much googling - to the question you ask about the extent of black on white crime statistics from the US government. But first I would like to pose the same question I asked Reality dude above, which was this:
There are 38 million blacks in America. 18 million are black males. 6 million blacks are between 16 and 34 (approximately). How many violent crimes would you say this age group could commit against white people to convince you that blacks are intentionally targeting whites for violent crimes? 10,000, 20,000, 50,000? ?whoa whoa whoa -- I'm not trying to prove anything. I merely want to see the data.
Also - I'm not looking at Black against White, or White against Black violence --- I'm looking for VIOLENT crimes and THEFT crimes. BvW and WvB violence would be included in this information.
Also, I want the info to be from a reputable source that isn't impartial.
However, your question was, basically, "how much black violence would convince you to admit that blacks might be more violent than whites?". And, honestly, I think it would need to be a SIGNIFICANT disparity in the Violent-crime / Population-of-race. At least a 7% difference.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago
0O.P.:
This is pretty sickening ! And by that I mean this origional posting ! One can , at any given time , search out incidents of prejudicial violence ! Hell , theres enough going on anywhere ! You my friend obviously went looking for all these incidents with an agenda! You might hide behind your avatar image and spread this type of bias crap all you want . But the truth is obvious ....YOU are prejudiced to the extreme! A little advice put up your real name and picture when you feel like being a "journalist", stop hiding behind the image that you are just enlightening us all! Only a fool can end up so prejudiced after all the education available today! You sir ,are a fool!I totally disagree with you old guy (a horseback). I bet you live in a nice white community (Northern NewEngland) and don't have to worry about getting ganged up on.
Is there a contest sucker punching white people by blacks? YES
Are there numerous recent incidences? Yes
I wonder how fast you could run when being chased? I mean at your age? I ran pretty fast (Im young). Maybe that's why I'm here today. Where's your sympathy for all the victims old guy?
Here's the crime statistics on black racism and hate and violence in America today. I mean there deliberate attacking of white people. I mean how BAD it has become
In 2005, this is I think the only time ever the government gave race on race crime figures, I can't find any other than this, and I looked hard.
In 2005, there were a reported 645,000 reported interracial crimes. Blacks committed 581,000 of them...Against WHITE PEOPLE. More that 90%!!!
Now let me do the math here for you (put my useless college degree to work). That computes to about 1 out of 10 black males between 16 and 34 will commit a violent act against a white person PER YEAR! 1 out of 10!!!
As for whites, my math computes to 1 out of 600 will commit a violent act against blacks.
Also old guy, you want to tell everyone here how much money you've given to the victims of these knockdown games to help them recover - or compensate their family when the victim dies? I mean since there are so few, why don't offer to pay out of your own pocket? Show everyone what a nice old guy u are - in your white community. You are safe behind the lines old guy and you're telling the other white people who face this or wonder if they're going to face it, to stay the course. Some would call that being a coward
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati … ;cset=trueHow bout this pissant , learn to defend yourself ! Your quoting numbers you don't even understand ! Lets see about one in what ? ten Americans is black . Your getting smacked down .....fight back. ! Grow a pair. however being prejudiced , as you are isnt exactly a victimless crime either . By far most of the crimes of violence commited by blacks are against blacks. By the way , come to my "white" neighborhood , we don't run away from violence , we stand up to it!
I can defend myself old guy. But not when its 3,4,8,15 against one...and its a sucker punch to the face. You say you stand up to violence? Really, brave guy from New England area - so brave up there...aren't you...
How would you defend yourself against 32 black males/
http://www.denverpost.com/frontpage/ci_13843272
How does an 81 year old defend himself old guy?
http://www2.newsadvance.com/news/2010/s … ar-489549/
How does a disabled woman defend herself?
http://sacramento.cbslocal.com/2011/10/ … trip-mall/
How does a guy defend himslef against 10 or more-brave guy?
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article … udent.html
I can post more but useless. You talk a big game BUT...
As for the crime stats I gave you a link and I can read the stats as easily as you. Obviously, those stats include all violent crime black against whites : rapes, robbery, murder, attempted murder, beatdowns, etc. White people are 5 times as great as blacks in numbers. If the stats were even for both races, that means that there would be 2.5 million black victims. Truth is, our government is hiding interracial crimes stats. WHY? I wonder why? I got a good idea!Dont ask me why such idiousy is to be allowed in the forums , Perhaps my young pissant Taylor, its because of free speech! But I believe that your stats are as blind as your hatred for all the people of color. Whered you get your links from the KKK?
Believe it or not, I think even the KKK would have been more subtle than this brigade.
Let's begin with this type of story:
http://ccrjustice.org/stopandfrisk
http://publicintelligence.net/former-de … st-quotas/
There is no doubt that certain segments of the population are targeted more than others....
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid … 848706206#http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati … ;cset=true
90% of all interracial violence is black on white. 1 out of 10 black males between 16 and 34 will victimize a white person PER YEAR. It's out of control in my book.
I'm glad leretseh had the balls to post this issue! Im mad at white people here who are in total denial.
Also, I just read that government statistics say that 57% of all homicides come from black males. Maybe that's why cops stop n frisk. I dont see black police officers complaining about the tactic. Also, there are a few bad cops. Statistically, they a good bunch of people. Statically, blacks are committing virtually ALL the violence on an interracial basis between white and black.
Deal with THAT dude. White people DO COUNT as victims...at least to me.
I'm sure the libs will find a problem with who reported this completely ignoring where the statistics came from.
http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=de7_1212 … comments=1- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Drop your bias' and look at the real facts , your numbers are way off. But I'll say one thing .....your pregudging is right on!
Re: your last comment to me. You quoted several sources, I made comments regarding one. One newspaper that is known in the UK to be biased in the extreme. I was merely pointing that out. I thought as a US citizen you may now be aware of that fact. It appears that it is you who does not like the truth.
I don't care who the source is if the facts are clear, you on the other hand would rather bury your head in the sand than admit blacks are more likely to commit crimes than whites.
In the UK there is the great white sport, beloved of all louts called, and excuse the hubpages inflicted mealy mouth, "people with dark skin bashing" where white youths go out and inflict deliberate harm, even death, on coloured people.
I think thats cowardly if it really is happening. But where is Jeff Berndt or others saying "prove it'? " Calling u a Fear monger" Double standards I see. White victims are to be ignored! Well, not by me!
Oh,and dude, really, provide a source for your white guy beatdowns on "colored people.k? I want to ri[p into these low lifes!You don't believe it is really happening! Wow, talk about naive.
My point, repairguy47, which you have so eloquently missed, is that it is hig hly unlikely that you will ever gather "facts" from the Daily Mail! Your source is unreliable, and argument has no real substance- If you really want to find some substantial evidence, try Google Scholar- then learn how to analyze and evaluate what you read!
I would, if you were able to provide some reliable data. You may not care about the sources, however, reliable sources are needed to reach some form of conclusion. Newspapers, be it left or right, are not the most reliable sources. Try university libraries, look for independent studies. It appears to me that you have formulated your opinion and try to find evidence, however unreliable, to support your view.
What do you want? To win an argument, or learn something?
Crime is the product of inequality which is the basis of for profit systems.
This is nonsense. In a world where everyone were born truly equal and treated everyone completely equally (that is, non-discriminatory), people would still make profits.
The nature of crime is significantly more complicated than mere inequality. Why, if inequality causes crime, are crime rates are drastically lower in poor rural areas - even taking meth production into account - than in middle income urban areas? Why is the crime rate in middle income suburban areas lower than in wealthy urban areas? Culture, sub-culture, anonymity, mobility, opportunity, community all have more to do with crime than inequality.
There are differing crime rates between poor communities within urban areas, why? If the answers to the problem of crime were as easily arrived at as the knee jerk - "inequality" - than why is there crime? For that matter, why is there inequality? It is the common failure of those who would seek a universal solution to an individual problem.
Poverty, ignorance, crime, etc... are not products of some grand systemic failure but rather the product of personal, individual choices. The accumulation of bad choices, by individuals, results in any number of social ills.
Man, how can this racist thread still be allowed to continue. The OP and his sockpuppets are trolling this garbage still, two days later?
Moderator needs to come in and nix this thing and ban all the OP's accounts, IMO. Not because I'm opposed to free speech. Everyone has a right to say any stupid or evil thing they want, no matter how obviously inaccurate or how pitiful it makes them look. But racist sockpuppet trolling seems like it ought to be against HP TOS.I know. I'm disgusted by this and would like to see the people involved banned entirely. They really shouldn't ever be part of this community.
I'm not sure.
I have ...practically nothing so far as respect for what we're now calling "sock puppets" - and so I'd prefer that if someone were going to go about this sort of thread....that they have a damned name and face - for accountability....but I'm not truly sure I think this is something that should be censored.
Several of Leretseh's racist hubs have been taken down.
To Pcunix: I totally agree. This is an abominably racist thread. This forum should be removed by the moderator and the instigators of this(they KNOW who they are) should be totally banned from the HubPages community. This community is a loving, intellectual, and open minded community. We have no needs for atavistic thinking people here. Thank you, Pcunix, you have indeed expressed my sentiments.
I think if you read the responses of many to this thread you will find it much less racist than you believe. What is the most common reaction? Is it a desire to address significant issues regarding the nature of crime? The disconcerting fact that a far greater percentage of Blacks are crime victims and criminals? Crime in the Black community is distressing at the least. I fear for the future of young Black men I have known because, no matter how moral or successful they are, the community from which they come remains dangerous to them.
I just want to point out that it isn't necessarily racist. Facts are as facts do -- I just have yet to see significant or reliable statistics from disinterested third parties that show that "blacks are more violent than whites".
However, the OP was merely showing us a trend that happens to be racist in nature, and he backed it up with numerous articles.
The rest of the thread might have gotten a little out of hand, but the OP's isn't so horrible that we shouldn't discuss it.Okay, as long as I can point out that I have been asked literally hundreds of times by black people for a smoke... never have I been punched immediately afterwards.
Wurd.
Once again, I'm not trying to prove anything here - I just want to see the actual statistics.
Can ANYONE show me "Violent Crimes and Property Damage Crimes, and the threats thereof, on a national level broken down by race"?
If I could just find these numbers, I would begin to make statements.
Let us settle this once and for all.
F.B.I. statistics show that although blacks account for only about 13% of the U.S. population, members of their group account for over 40% of the arrests each year for violent crimes (aggravated assault, armed robbery, forcible rape and murder).
Now, on the face, that makes it appear that blacks are the most violent group of people in America. However, that is a very simplistic way of viewing the situation.
First, the primary reason why blacks have such a high rate violent crime is many of them are afflicted with high degrees of self-hatred and profound feelings of inferiority.
Second, the vast majority of violent crimes committed by blacks are "black-on-black" in nature. Only a relative handful are "black-on-white" in nature. It is just that when blacks commit violent crimes against whites, those incidences get a whole lot more news media coverage than when some "home boy" guns down another "home boy."
Now, the big question is, why is there so much violence among blacks?
Well, similar to what I stated before, many, if not most, blacks are afflicted with a high-degree of self-hatred and profound feelings of inferiorty. And those realities drive many of them to "act out" in violent or anti-social ways.
The next big question is why are so many blacks afflicted with a high-degree of self-hatred and profound feelings of inferiority.
The answer is blacks' widespread self-hatred and feelings of inferiority grew out of the following: (1) Hundreds of years of being enslaved. (2) Hundreds of years of being discriminated against in nearly every aspect of U.S. society. (3)Centuries of being forcibly shut out from the nation's mainstream. (4)Hundreds of years of being psychologically conditioned to believe that black skin, kinky hair and Negroid facial features are grossly inferior to white skin, straight hair and Caucasoid facial features. (5) A great many decades of having deep feelings of hopelessness, desperation, anger and bitterness -- largely because it appears that they have been relegated to second-class "forever."
Thus, it is time for what I call a new movement. It is time for a new order of "black leadership" to rise up and lead a bold new endeavor based entirely on unlimited black enterprise, capitalism and self-determination.
It is time to get government out of the business of addressing the social and economic problems among blacks because the only thing it ever does is throw money at the problems and come up with programs that do not come anywhere close to addressing the very serious psychological problems that exists among many, if not most, black people.
In other words, it is time for blacks to take matters into their own hands.If you would just give me a citation for this information, I would begin to agree with you or not.
And don't get me wrong: I understand the effects of "majority/minority" effects on people, and I understand that the drug wars aren't helping the poor communities either.
Also, we should add in that we should be comparing the crime rates by race IN THE SAME LOCATION.
After all, poor people are more likely to be violent criminals than richer people, and the majority of the richer people are likely white/asian in this country.What in the hell do you mean give you a "citation for this information?"
What would be satisfactory for you, a treatise that would include footnotes?
Obviously, you have a computer so Google "black history in America." By doing that, you will find a wealth of information that discusses everything I mentioned in my comment.
And here is a suggestion to help you get started. Look up a book entitled, "Before the Mayflower, A History of the Negro In America, 1619 to 1955," by Lerone Bennett, Jr.You wrote: "F.B.I. statistics show that although blacks account for only about 13% of the U.S. population, members of their group account for over 40% of the arrests each year for violent crimes (aggravated assault, armed robbery, forcible rape and murder). "
But didn't back it up with a citation.
Also, your citation only shows "arrests", not "convictions". I want a jury involved.
So... drop the emo and read what you wrote? Yeah, I think I'll go with that.
Nice try, though!Someone who is as brilliant as you are should know that every year, the Federal Bureau of Investigation publishes the statistics for arrests in all categories of crime -- and I did write, "F.B.I. statistics show ..." (that is my "citation" and I am not going to go through the trouble of setting up a link to that information for the likes of you. If you want to check it out for yourself, Google fbi crime statistics).
And your "arrests vs. convictions remark" is silly. You are just trying to jerk my chain.
Furthermore, it is no secret that blacks have the highest rate of violent crime in the country. No one has to be apprised of "official statistics" to be made aware of that. Even the majority of blacks readily admit that their racial society has the highest rate of violent crime.
In fact, I suggest that you start paying visits to one of your local ghettos on a nightly basis. By doing that, you will quickly obtain a whole lot of first-hand knowledge of just how much violence there is among blacks, assuming that you come out of the whole thing alive and with your car.Feenix,
Evan loves to spew his garble but he has no clue to what he says. I use to make him Cite sources to back what he spewed but he could not or he would show things that were just someone elses opinion.
Never fear Feenix, Evan will never get near the hood, in an earlier thread, this is the guy that would not do everything he could to save his kidnaped wife.I taught in the hood.
And I cited a source for my information.
So, good job on that one.
It's always funny because you don't accept any information that contradicts what you have to say as "evidence".
Remember when I showed you a specific example of how the US was involved in Middle Eastern Politics since 1914, and then you said that 'Harvard Professors don't count as a source'?
Remember when I then showed that this year was the year when the US got involved with Middle Eastern Politics from some 4 other sources? Then you just said I was spouting the beliefs of some Harvard professor?
Yeah. Citing evidence to you is a waste of time. Especially because I did cite evidence numerous times to you, and you just say "nope. I disagree with it, therefore it isn't."Why aren't you teaching in the 'hood today? Why did you leave?
Did you get run out of there? Did you get tired of getting your bottom kicked every day? Did you get sick and tired of dealing with all those inferior darkies? Did you get promoted to a higher teaching position in a white school that has all of the latest teaching aides while the black one you taught at had an insufficient number of teaching aides? Did you get tired of barely escaping carjackings on your way to and from work?LOLOL - wow.
Actually, it was for my student teaching.
Nice try on making sound like a racist jerk.
I think we can safely say that this conversation is over.Oh, I see what happened.
The school board you work for, or worked for, broke in its new teachers by using the baptism-under-fire technique.No. That's actually not it at all.
Wow. I'm glad that you just assume things.
Many students went to the creme de la creme schools, and many went to le crap de la crap schools.
Also, not many positions open for student teaching Japanese. I went where they were available.
Once again, quit LOOKING for bias and discrimination. People generally find what they're looking for.
This conversation is dead - I'm only going to respond if you make more blatantly false assumptions.
feenix,
He never taught in the hood, he is full of itI wonder how many Black teachers would leave the hood for all of the perks you mentioned? I use to volunteer at the local High School it wasn't in the hood by any stretch of the imagination but it had a few wannabe gang members. I helped in the building trades class and allowed some of the kids to work on some of my personal jobs. There were a couple of kids who bowed up to me on the jobsite because their future life as thugs seemed a more lucrative gig for them, both of them learned that acting tough and being tough are actually two different things.
You showed false information like now, You use a blogger, that is an opinion and you have a hard time understanding that. And it was you that refused to admit the cources you provided were harvard professers.
Get outta here with that.
The truth is poor people are no more likely than "richer people" to be violent criminals.
A perfect example of that is, the majority of serial killers are what could be described as "richer white males."
Additionally, poverty does not cause people to be violent criminals. If that were the case, there would about 50-million blood-thirsty thugs running around in the streets.
What usually causes individuals to be violent criminals -- whether they are rich or poor, or white or black -- are various kinds of psychological and emotional disorders.Actually, I have statistics to prove my point about violence taking place by poorer individuals rather than richer: Whenever I use "schooldigger.com" and I'm searching school districts in richer neighborhoods, the violent crime rates are astonishingly lower than those in poorer areas. (PS - check out schooldigger.com, it's pretty cool).
For example, here's one of the richest schools in Ohio:
http://www.schooldigger.com/go/OH/schoo … ?entity=67
And here's one of the poorer:
http://www.schooldigger.com/go/OH/schoo … ?entity=67
As you can see "citywide" crimes (especially violent) are much higher than both state and nation in the poorer city than in the richer city. This trend has maintained for every school district in many states throughout the nation. The richer city is a suburb of the poorer city, and thus the locations of the two schools are largely irrelevant.
This can easily be explained: People who work well with one another are sought after in business, and they make money. Then they take that money and move out away from dangerous areas.
However, now I'm curious if you can back up your own statements:
"The truth is poor people are no more likely than "richer people" to be violent criminals."
Got anything to back it up?
"What usually causes individuals to be violent criminals -- whether they are rich or poor, or white or black -- are various kinds of psychological and emotional disorders."
Wouldn't "being dangerously poor" cause "psychological and emotion disorders"? Because, I'm pretty sure it can.
PS - I don't know if you've read my other posts, but I'm just trying to get pure raw statistics that say "XYZ race has been convicted for violent crimes at this rate over a national scale in comparison to ZYX race in a similar location".
I'm actually surprised it's hard to find these statistics. The statistics I've posted only really account for socio-economic differences, not race. You'd think that this would be important for insurance agencies, police offices, and any sort of local business man, etc.
Please drop the emo and give me statistics to this effect, and we'll continue a discussion.Use your common sense.
Of course more crime takes place in impoverished areas and among impoverished people. However, it is not the poverty that drives the lawbreakers to commit violent crimes. The commission of their crimes stem from the psychological and/or emotional disorders they suffer, largely as the result of their psychologically-conditioned self-hatred and feelings of inferiority.
As a matter of fact, that is why the crime rate is rapidly climbing in the lily-white suburbs. In today's hectic world, more-and-more whites, especially young ones, are suffering serious psychological and emotional disorders. And the presence of those disorders is driving many of them to do such things as use dangerous street drugs and "illegal prescription drugs", have "sex parties," vandalize property, and commit violent crimes.
And similar to what I stated before, if poverty were the cause of violent crime, about one-third of the black population, or about 12-million blacks, would be violent criminals.
The truth is, the average poor person, whether black, brown or white, is an honest, non-violent, law-abiding person.
And I will say it one more time: Blacks' high rate of violent crime is rooted in the psychological damage suffered by blacks from hundreds of years of cruel, inhumane and unjust treatment by whites. Not poverty.Just a reminder - I'm not talking about race, I'm talking about socio-economic trends. I have yet to see a single successfully cited report or study about ABC being more violent than XYZ.
Sorry, every time I ask people about common sense, theirs is different than mine.
In fact, I DID use common sense: people who make money are less likely to be violent, then they use that money to move away from violence.
Then you said that my common sense was wrong.
.... but the stats agreed with me...
Oh well! I'm gonna go with my common sense AND the stats.
Oh, and before I go, let me put two of your quotes side by side so that you can deal with what you've told me in the past few days:
"Of course more crime takes place in impoverished areas and among impoverished people."
"The truth is poor people are no more likely than "richer people" to be violent criminals."
These two comments are NOT contradictory, but they're really making you dance.
Then you said this doozy:
"The commission of their crimes stem from the psychological and/or emotional disorders they suffer, largely as the result of their psychologically-conditioned self-hatred and feelings of inferiority"
... RIGHT AFTER you said that "However, it is not the poverty that drives the lawbreakers to commit violent crimes."
Which is it? Does being poor lead people to be conditioned about inferiority? Or does being poor NOT lead to being conditioned?Man, you make the late Johnny Cochran look like an amateur. You are a real pro when it comes to twisting other people's words and flipping the context in which they were written.
Buy, hey, if it makes you feel good, then keep right on doing it.Sorry that you have yet to show me any evidence that poor areas of the US don't commit more violence.
You know, backing up your claims?
I showed you evidence to support my argument.
Reminder: I'm not talking about race, I'm talking about socio-economic situations.What you showed is minipulating BS trying to sell one school district. That school district has 1178 students, HA, my senior graduating class from high school had 800. You cannot make a claim about crimes based on sections of population . The odds of crime per 100,000 stat is bogus when only 3,000 live in the town as opposed to a town that has say 20,000. The odds of a crime has just gone up. It is like getting into an accicent with a drunk. The odds go up the later in the day you go.
Ok... I'll pick any "suburban school district" and compare it to "that suburb's major urban area"
Pick the city! Let's do this!
I was going to do New York City, but it isn't posting the data for crime rates.Here's Minneapolis' urban center:
http://www.schooldigger.com/go/MN/schoo … ?entity=67
As we can see, lots of violence.
Here's a suburb of Minneapolis: Blaine.
http://www.schooldigger.com/go/MN/schoo … ?entity=67
The crime rate is significantly lower.Pick what you what, you miss the point. the more people thereare the better the odds crime will go up because there are more targets. Just like my DWI point. How many drunk drivers do you think are on the road at 8:00AM as compared to 8:00PM.
There you go again, putting words in my mouth.
Where in the hell did I write that there is not more violence in poor areas than there is in other areas?
I have plenty of first-hand knowledge that poor areas are far more violent than "non-poor areas" are. I was born and raised in South-Central Los Angeles and for many years, I have been residing in the East Harlem section of New York City.
I know where the violence is and back in the day when I was teenager, I was a "Low Rider" and a violent street-gang member myself.Then why are we fighting?
If we agree that there is more violence in poor areas, then we agree.The disagreement is on why there's more violent crime in poor areas.
Evan seems to think it's because when you're poor, you want to steal to be able to eat regularly.
feenix seems to think that it's because when you're poor, you're more likely to be somehow psychologically damaged and be okay with stuff like armed robbery.
Interestingly, feenix's hypothesis sounds very "liberal:" they steal because of low self-esteem, or some other society-caused problem. He might be right.
But some wealthy people still steal, and not because they need to feed themselves or their families, and not because poverty makes them feel bad about themselves.I would like to say that all I really wanted to prove was that the statement "more violent crime happens in poorer areas" is true.
I just gave A possible explanation of why this is true.The rate of crime is just as high among rich people as it is among poor people. It is just that the two groups tend to commit different kinds of crimes.
While the poor commit a very large number of violent crimes (because those are usually their "crimes of opportunity") the rich commit a very large number of white-collar crimes (because those are usually their "crimes of opportunity").
And why do you suppose there are so many "filthy homeless bums" on the streets of the big cities? I'll tell you why. Those types are largely poor people who cannot bring themselves to commit crimes to feed and clothe themselves.
And nowhere have I suggested that it is just fine for people to commit crimes to feed themselves. You are trying to run a game that makes you look good at my expense.
And congratulations to you because it is working. But I am man enough to accept that. That ain't no big thing, as far as I am concerned.And society, in the form of the judicial system, generally tends to be more forgiving of crimes committed by the wealthy.
"The rate of crime is just as high among rich people as it is among poor people. It is just that the two groups tend to commit different kinds of crimes."
If we're talking about Violent crimes, I'm going to have to prove you wrong with the statistics I cited.
Even "non-violent" crimes (i.e., not real crimes) showed a large disparity between rich and poor.
I would say that many crimes committed by the rich might be bigger in scale --Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan, Congress, The President -- but people have been brain washed to think these aren't crimes.
I must demand that this statement is not true. ... Unless you can prove your statement?Now you are aguing just for the sake of arguing.
So, if it makes you happy, I will concede that you are right and that I have not sufficiently proven my case.
And I really do hope that makes your day.
feenix says:
The rate of crime is just as high among rich people as it is among poor people. It is just that the two groups tend to commit different kinds of crimes.
Yes, this is absolutely true! Wealthy criminals tend to do crimes like fraud, embezzlement, influence peddling (a-la Blago), that kind of thing.
While the poor commit a very large number of violent crimes (because those are usually their "crimes of opportunity") the rich commit a very large number of white-collar crimes (because those are usually their "crimes of opportunity").
No argument there. 100% right.
And why do you suppose there are so many "filthy homeless bums" on the streets of the big cities? I'll tell you why. Those types are largely poor people who cannot bring themselves to commit crimes to feed and clothe themselves.
So, are the poor who have a place to live necessarily committing crimes to pay for them? Serious question. I've been hard up in my day, but I've never had to decide between stealing (and eating), or not stealing (and going hungry).
And nowhere have I suggested that it is just fine for people to commit crimes to feed themselves. You are trying to run a game that makes you look good at my expense.
No, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that you thought crime was okay when you're poor; I meant to say that whatever hypothetical psychological problems our hypothetical poor criminals have make them rationalize the hypothetical crimes they might commit.* So, sorry about that.
And congratulations to you because it is working. But I am man enough to accept that. That ain't no big thing, as far as I am concerned.Well, thanks, I guess, but that's not what I meant to be doing, so, the egg's on my face, really.
Your clarification below, though (the one about black folks committing crimes because of centuries of slavery and other institutionalized maltreatment at the hands of the dominant majority), tells me that you meant the psychological roots of crime to be limited to black folks, and you might be right about that, too--at least as far as those particular roots of crime go.
Nowhere have I written that poverty causes people to be pyschologically damaged. If that were true, I would be a mentally-deranged serial killer, because I have lived in poverty for much of my life.
What I wrote, more than once, is that the psychological disorders that a considerable number of blacks are suffering stems from hundreds of years of brainwashing and cruel, inhumane and unjust treatment by whites.
We are fighting because we have a difference in opinion concerning the cause of violent crime. You contend that it stems from poverty and I contend that it stems from psychological and emotional disorders that can affect the rich as well as the poor.
For example, why do some pro-athletes and entertainers who are far from being poor -- who are making millions of dollars a year -- commit violent crimes?
The answer is, they are suffering deep psychological and emotional problems.
When it comes to rich violent criminals, O.J. Simpson and the late Fatty Arbuckle lead the list.Well, allow me to contract any and all assumptions as to why poorer areas are more violent. I merely wanted to show that they were.
I probably screwed that up, somewhere.You did not screw up at all. It is just that it is very difficult for one to fully express himself/herself, or to fully make his/her point, in a writing forum.
Now, if we were sitting around with each other in someone's livingroom or backyard, we would be able to really lay out the ways in which we feel about things.Once again, however, I must insist that I have yet to see a statistic that shows that rich people are equally violently criminal as the poor.
You don't get it, do you.
The truth is a great many rich people are just as criminal as a great many poor people are. It is just that the two groups commit different kinds of crimes.
And when some rich dude makes millions of dollars from peddling sub-prime mortgages to unsophisticated poor people who do not understand what they are getting into, and end up in the streets after being foreclosed on, you do not consider that to be a violent crime?Don't get me wrong, I hate white collar criminals a whole lot. Ben Bernanke, Alan Greenspan, Bush, Cheney should all be in jail.
But I'm talking about violent crimes, and I want stats to prove it. Not just some sort of "I hate rich people" rants. I could just make a hub of that.
I'm also looking for numbers of people, not weight of crime. Surely the argument "how much is a human life worth" comes into question here: Ben Bernanke steals Trillions of dollars of wealth from Society and goes free, but gangs on the streets are killing each other day in and day out and ALSO don't go to jail. How much is a human life worth?
So, once again, numbers of criminals is what I'm looking for. The only stats I've seen are ones suggesting that more violent / property crimes are committed in poorer areas than in richer areas.First, I am not one of your of students so I am not going to complete any assignments for you.
I have laid out the way I see things and that is all that is necessary. I could not care less that you believe that I have not provided enough supporting data or whatever it is that you keep bugging me about.
Second, I have not been doing any "I hate rich people rants." If I were doing that, I would be ranting at myself, because I am a rich person, a "one-percenter," in fact.
feenix:"...when some rich dude makes millions of dollars from peddling sub-prime mortgages to unsophisticated poor people who do not understand what they are getting into, and end up in the streets after being foreclosed on, you do not consider that to be a violent crime?"
Well, if Evan doesn't (I don't either) that's probably because it's not a violent crime. No threat of violence took place when some loan officer took advantage of someone's financial naiivete and got them to take out a loan they would never realistically be able to pay back.
That kind of crime is much more insidious.
I'd almost rather be robbed than defrauded, 'cos at least a robbery is honest, and I have the up-front choice of fighting back or not. (Though given my choice, I'd decline to be robbed, too.)You say tomato and I say tamater. What we have here is what could be described as a battle over semantics.
And in my opinion, ripping off people by running con games on them is a form of violence. It is an example of people sustaining injuries from something other than natural causes. It is in the same league as a thug injuring someone by going upside his head with a lead pipe.
But because much of the judicial system has the same attitude that you evidently have, when some thug robs someone for a couple of dollars, he just might get sentenced to 10 or 20 years to life in some tough penitentiary. On the other hand, however, when some white collar thug steals thousands of dollars from his employer, chances are he will only be sentenced to a couple of years in a "country-club detention center."
Finally, I must say that I do applaud you for stating that the ripping off of certain kinds of people is more insidious than such crimes as small-time robberies.feenix:You say tomato and I say tamater. What we have here is what could be described as a battle over semantics.
And in my opinion, ripping off people by running con games on them is a form of violence. It is an example of people sustaining injuries from something other than natural causes. It is in the same league as a thug injuring someone by going upside his head with a lead pipe.
Well, I dunno if it's a tomato/tomater thing. If someone steals my money by fraud, they have my money. I can get more. If someone gives me the pipe to the head, I'm going to be in the hospital, and might need to re-learn to talk, and might never be able to earn money again. So, there's a bit of a difference.
But the fraudster is a more insidious criminal than the mugger. The mugger never betrayed my trust; the fraudster did.
But because much of the judicial system has the same attitude that you evidently have, when some thug robs someone for a couple of dollars, he just might get sentenced to 10 or 20 years to life in some tough penitentiary. On the other hand, however, when some white collar thug steals thousands of dollars from his employer, chances are he will only be sentenced to a couple of years in a "country-club detention center."
Aha, here's where I have the honor of having been misunderstood by you: I do not think convicted fraudsters should get the "country club" treatment when sentenced to jail. They should go to the same jails that any criminal goes to. Maybe they aren't violent, but they're criminals, just like the muggers are, and do not deserve to be treated any differently.
Finally, I must say that I do applaud you for stating that the ripping off of certain kinds of people is more insidious than such crimes as small-time robberies.
Well, thanks. And I absolutely think that fraud (and other means of bilking people out of their money) is more insidious than a straight-up robbery. I respect a robber more than a fraudster (not that I respect either of them much).
What really makes me crazy is when something like this happens.
Long story short, poor, desperate, homeless guy robs a bank, takes only $100 (because that was "all [he] needed"), is overcome with remorse, and returns the money with an apology, and surrenders to police. He gets 15 years in jail. In contrast, a mortgage lender CEO helps defraud people out of a total of about $3billion, and gets caught. returns none of the money, but agrees to testify against his co-conspirators, and gets three years in jail.
What the heck is wrong with our courts that we can send the homeless guy up the river for 15 years after he turned himself in, but the sneak-weenie who would still be defrauding people if he hadn't been caught only gets 3 years?
I can't prove it, but I'm pretty sure that the race of each defendant played a role in their sentencing.Hey, Jeff, I really do agree with you concerning the injury from fraud vs. injury from getting slammed in the head with a lead pipe situation. When I wrote that, I was trying to be dramatic. And I cannot help doing that kind of a thing, because I was born and raised in Hollywood. ;-)
Also, I believe that when you get right down to it, you and I have a lot more in common than we do not have in common.Hey, Jeff, I really do agree with you concerning the injury from fraud vs. injury from getting slammed in the head with a lead pipe situation. When I wrote that, I was trying to be dramatic. And I cannot help doing that kind of a thing, because I was born and raised in Hollywood. ;-)
I hear you.
Also, I believe that when you get right down to it, you and I have a lot more in common than we do not have in common.
Oh, I think that's probably the case with most people of good will. We seem to agree on what many of the problems are in America.
Our main areas of disagreement seem to be on how best to solve them.Yeah. And once again, it's mostly this simple: some of us are willing to open our wallets and some of us are not. Some of us think that the world is chock full of people out to cheat us and some of us do not. Some of us realize that a social safety net is an important part of a strong economy, that it can encourage small business startups, for example, and some do not. Some of us think that providing medical care for everyone is not just humane but also makes financial sense and some refuse to see that. Some of us won't vote for Republicans and some of us will.
And once again, it's mostly this simple: some of us are willing to open our wallets and some of us are not.
It isn't even as simple as that, PC. Many people who vote against public assistance, pell grants, etc are very willing to donate to charitable causes.
I think the main difference is that some folks think everyone who needs help ought to get help, with no preference based on faith, or race, or ability (or willingness) to work, or whatever, and some want to be able to pick and choose people worthy of getting help (whatever "worthy" means).
Some of us think that the world is chock full of people out to cheat us and some of us do not.
Do you mean some people believe that welfare fraud is more pervasive than it really is? Or that some people believe that corporate malfeasance is more pervasive than it really is? I think the main difference is who we think is trying to game the system.
Some of us realize that a social safety net is an important part of a strong economy, that it can encourage small business startups, for example, and some do not. Some of us think that providing medical care for everyone is not just humane but also makes financial sense and some refuse to see that.
Nobody seems to be willing to take a look at a country like Norway, which has been consistently scoring higher than the US on the Legatum group's Prosperity index, and see that they have public education, public healthcare, and a robust social safety net, and still aren't a repressive communist regime, and have a budget surplus. But hey, ideology often trumps reality in US politics.
Some of us won't vote for Republicans and some of us will.
The GOP isn't the only problem in US politics. The Dems are nearly as bad (not quite, but nearly). After the recent everyone-7 Senate vote to let the military indefinitely detain US citizens, I won't vote for either party.Wow, you got me dancing in the aisle, shaking my tamborine.
I'll take that as being satiric.
But I mean what I say. I don't buy the arguments you propose. I don't know why you think the way you do, but I am sad that you do,Hmmmm, I dunno. Perhaps I think the way I do because I ate too many lead-paint chips when I was a little kid growing up in the ghetto.
If you did grow up in those circumstances, maybe you feel that way because you saw too many people abusing the system?
Did you ever think that your perception might be flawed because of your closeness to it? The forest and trees thing, you know?
For example, if you happened to know three or four cheaters, you might have assumed everyone was doing the same thing when in fact they were not. You might make all sorts of assumptions and those could color your opinions the rest of your life.
That sort of opinion gets bellowed into rage by right wing propaganda like Newt's recent lies about food stamps financing Hawaiian vacations. On it goes - everybody is trying to steal your hard earned money, the liberals are all commies, nobody values hard work anymore.. it's all false perception.For your information, back in 1950's and 1960's when I was growing up, there were very few slackers. For example, nearly everyone in the poor all-black community I grew up in was self-reliant, self-sufficient and worked very hard for his/her money.
Back in the day when I was a young man, the vast majority of poor black people considered being on welfare a fate worse than death. They had a whole lot of heart and a whole lot of pride.
However, all of that was stripped away from them by such socialists-communists as Martin Luther King, Jr. and the Democrat Party in the form that it morphed into during mid-1960's.
If you disagree with any of the above, it is because you were not around during the 1950's and 1960's.I wasn't around?
I'm 63 years old. I was "around".
Martin Luther King a communist????
I think I've wasted too much time on you. Goodbye.Yes, Martin Luther King, Jr. was a stone-cold, hardcore communist and the so-called Civil Rights Movement was set into motion by Soviet operatives -- and that is not some wayout conspiracy theory. It is the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
Furthermore, I must add that back in late 1960's and early 1970's, I held both Top Secret and Krypto security clearances, and I consider that to be enough said.Oooh.. commies everywhere! Where's Joe McCarthy when we need him most!
I better go check under my bed! I bet there are commie pinko socialist libtards hiding there!As quiet as it is being kept, Joe McCarthy was a patriot and American hero.
It is just that many of the powerful and influential lefties in the major media that he was exposing as being enemies of America succeeded at demonizing him and making him look like a wild-eyed alarmist.
And if you knew anything about what took place during the "Cold War," you would be well aware that the both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. carried out a number of subversive actions against each other.
Specifically, the U.S. did all it could to disrupt the internal affairs in the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union did all it could to disrupt the internal affairs in the U.S.
And one of the ways that the Soviets attempted to disrupt the internal affairs in America was to stoke the fires of the nation's racial divisions and "racial problems."As quiet as it is being kept, Joe McCarthy was a patriot and American hero.
It is just that many of the powerful and influential lefties in the major media that he was exposing as being enemies of America succeeded at demonizing him and making him look like a wild-eyed alarmist.
Well, I'm sure he felt that he was doing the right thing. He may even have actually been doing the right thing at the beginning of his career. But like many people who started out as heroes, he lived long enough to become a villain.
And if you knew anything about what took place during the "Cold War," you would be well aware that the both the U.S. and the U.S.S.R. carried out a number of subversive actions against each other.
Specifically, the U.S. did all it could to disrupt the internal affairs in the Soviet Union, and the Soviet Union did all it could to disrupt the internal affairs in the U.S.
No argument.
And one of the ways that the Soviets attempted to disrupt the internal affairs in America was to stoke the fires of the nation's racial divisions and "racial problems."
Can you expand on that? I'm curious what you mean, given your work in the Army and your security clearance. Of course, if you can't talk about details because they're classified, fine, but if not, I'd love to hear about it.
(Maybe in a hub?)Jeff, it is interesting that you mentioned that I should bring up what I wrote about some of the Cold War tactics in a hub, because in the near future, I am going to do just that.
However, while writing about the information that I am aware of and was exposed to, I have to tread very carefully. If I reveal too much, I just might just get taken out by operatives of one of the federal intelligence or law-enforcement agencies ;-)
Joe McCarthy a patriot?
Again, your knowledge of history is abysmal.My knowledge of history is not abysmal at all. It is just that I have a different take on various aspects of it than you do.
And if you were a gentleman and scholar, you would recognize and acknowledge that.When someone says MLK was a commie and McCarthy was a patriot, I can't have any respect for any other opinions that person may have. I don't even want to be on the same planet with you.
What's up with you with the little laughing face? Are you literately-challenged?
I strongly suspect that you are a very unhappy person who leads a self-inflicted, miserable life. That is sad. I hope that you can turn things around for yourself.
Best wishes,
- paradigmsearchYeah, you're right. Do you know a good psychiatrist of psychologist in NYC who can help me become a happy person?
Actually, I finally got around to reading your profile.
"In closing, I must say that I am always driven to make positive contributions to U.S. society, as the well as the world as a whole, and to provide a helping hand to those who are not as fortunate as I."
Maybe you are OK after all.
Given the opportunity some people just can't help dropping their drawers and showing off their intellect.
So you agree with that ridiculous assessment? Why am I not surprised?
I'll tell you what is ridiculous: A 63-year-old man who is out of touch with reality and who gets all bent out of shape when someone bursts his bubble.
No, I was commenting on your pithy and insightful response. It was full of reason and so measured.
And to that comment I add, a white dude's mind is a terrible thing to waste.
You and I live on the same planet now but we are from different planets.
You are from Venus and I am from Mars.
How do I know that you are from Venus? Se comportan como una perra.
Robert Kennedy must have held him in some esteem since he was the godfather to his children. McCarthy being a patriot or not is a matter of opinion not historical, but your opinion on what is or is not historical fact is what really matters. Grand arbiter of reality.
Says the one who thinks government welfare dates to 1830.
The difference being that rich people can afford to pay others for their violent actions.
Wait till he starts to correct your spelling, thats when you know he is just spewing and has no truth to tell
The Jewish people have been enslaved for thousands of years off & on and you don't see them going out and committing violent crimes against other people.
Yes, you're right so far as present-day violent crime is concerned.
But look at all of the other very serious crimes that Jews have committed down through the years.
I will mention just a few of the Jewish criminals: Julius and Ethel Rosenberg, Meyer Lansky, Bugsy Siegal, Mickey Cohen, Ivan Boesky, Bernie Madoff ...
When it comes to the commission of very serious crimes, no group of human beings holds a monopoly in that area.Been to Palestine lately? Settlers have been ousting Palestineans from their homes for decades, and blowing them up when they resist.
Before somebody tells me that I live in a safe white community - yes, I do.
But I also had customers in the heart of Roxbury, MA and have had tough looking young black "punks" help me find the business I was looking for and even lead me to it.
I detest racists.Me too. But especially the ones that provide dodgy, stupid sources that no reasonable, intelligent person would ever deem authoritative. Then they accuse the skeptic of being ostrich-like. Unbelievable.
"YOU LIVE IN A SAFE WHITE COMMUNITY!!!"
Sorry, I had to.I shouldn't have said "safe". There are lots of gun-owning conservatives here and they don't like ACLU atheist liberals like me very much.
They are all old, though, so they may not remember where the ammo is or what I look like. I mostly smile and remind them that all liberals are mentally confused so that they feel sorry for me. That seems to work.I love the logic behind hating an athiest:
"You WILL spend the rest of eternity in hell! Thus, I must insult you and make you feel like crap!"
Mind-boggling.So there is a hell and a heaven. Cite me a souce, prove it
" The accumulation of bad choices, by individuals, results in any number of social ills." "Just say No." I have been in very poor countries no crime. Most everybody was equally poor. The bigger the profits for illegal drugs the bigger the crime.
So your indictment is of profit or of illicit drugs?
Yes, it's horrific the way that heroin and crack ravage communities. I think you hit the nail on the head there though KYS, when you talked about people being equally poor. I'm sure when we think of the US/UK, even the poor are far better off than the poor in say, India. In some respects that's the problem with developed nations though isn't, relative poverty. The poor in more advanced nations are exposed to consumerism, they see on TV what others have and they want it. Hence, the risks they take for wealth.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Worse than coke,crack , heroin or any drug on a society, is racism ! The KKK lives on!
It does. But worst of all, racists are unable to recognize why so many poor people are from minority groups. They would prefer to insinuate that it's because of poor choices made, rather than inequality and lack of opportunity and discrimination.
Ahorse, So 580,000 white victims of black violence is KKK stuff?! 90% of all interracial violence, comes from blacks and it's against whites (2005), saying that is KKK stuff? Leretseh pointing out a bonafide contest by blacks playing a knockdown game, thats KKK stuff?
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nati … ;cset=true
Why don't you have any feelings for the victims here? Becasue they're All white victims?
Oh, and what do people expect from a forum titled Bias and Hate? If one people are clearly targeting another because of their race, I say that is racism and hate. Obviously, old guy (who says he's brave), you disagree. Why? Solely because of the skin color of the victims. What does that say about you? think about it brave old guyBut how do you know that 90% of all interracial violence is black on white?
Surely you mean 90% of reported violence is black on white?
In the UK, some years back now but no suggestion that anything has changed, the newspaper wisdom was that old people were at constant risk of street violence, especially from black youths. The actuality was that the largest group of victims of street violence were young black males, not old white females,or even young white males,but young black males.
I doubt if things are very much different in the US.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
It always amazes me to meet people ,otherwise intelligent, even quite liberal intellectuals , who when it comes right down to it are pure racists. I grew up a poor white kid and always thought that the truest American bias was against the poor. Little did I know that racism is economicly blind! If I was a moderator , I wouldn't allow such as this type of posting! So much for moderation!!!....So much for Hubpages ?
Neither would I. Maybe all that we can do is to give this thread no more oxygen.
I am just stepping into this exchange and all I have to say is it is impossible for whites to be racist towards me, a black man. And the reason why that is the case is I am just as good as anyone else -- and I am a whole lot better than a great many people.
Personally, I could not care less that there is racism all over the place. It does not stop me from exercising and enjoying Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.
And let us talk about blacks' disproportionate rate of violent crime.
Through centuries of slavery, discrimination and other forms of cruel and inhumane treatment of blacks, whites set the house on fire. And now that the house is fully ablaze, many whites are looking on and crying out, "Oh, what a shame that is. Just look at how savage blacks are behaving."
In other words, whites created the monster that is called "black crime." And many, if not most, contemporary whites are coming off like the past and present members of their race never did such a thing and that they are innocent victims.
So, get outta here complaining about blacks committing crimes against whites. For hundreds of years, whites treated blacks like they were livestock and now, the chickens have come home to roost.That's just a delightfully well-written bit of irony right there.
I must have missed this piece of brilliance. Whites should expect this behavior because they started it? Your attitude is exactly why racism still exists, if a majority of blacks think the white man deserves what he gets then I hope you are prepared for the hell that will rain down. The good thing is your militant opinion is in the minority.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Feenix , "Neither you a slave nor I a slavemaster "......Not today! Nor tomorrow. Violence is just violence , it knows no honor!
With all due respect, the situation is not nearly as simple as you stated it to be.
Even though I am not a slave and you are not a slavemaster, many of the negative outgrowths from blacks' enslavement for hundreds of years are still with us.
After all, slavery in the U.S. ended less than 150 years ago, and it is going to take more than 15 decades for the deep wounds that were inflicted on black society by hundreds of years of cruel and inhumane treatment to heal.
The problem with many whites today is they are in a state of denial when it comes to how badly their forebears damaged black society.
Yes, slavery is over but a very large number of contemporary blacks have numerous open and festering sores from that experience.Open and festering sores from that experience? What experience? Their experience is the same as mine, I read about it in books. 15 decades is plenty of time to heal.
Is it?
I came from wealth that stretched back much farther than fifteen decades. None of it reached me directly, but I certainly benefited from it because it gave me environment, connections and health.
My family might have started as slaves too, but if we did, it was hundreds of decades ago during Roman occupation of Britain. For all I know, though, we might have been the slave owners then.
Look, I know it's complicated. There's blame to go around. Black slaves were sold to white ship owners by their fellow blacks. Those same ship owners sometimes ended up as slaves in the countries they hoped to exploit. It wasn't a pretty time.
And yes, we've passed all the right laws and leveled the field. But it really isn't level - I know racists who live right in my community. I don't mean that they'd go join a lynching party, but they wouldn't be friends with a black man, wouldn't help them with advice or in any other way. They are the sad products of being taught by their parents that blacks are inferior, lazy, welfare cheats and their parents learned it from their own parents and yes, it does reach back fifteen decades.
It's not just in books. Yes, it's getting better. There is less ugliness, it's usually more subtle than overt, but it will take many more decades before it truly is gone forever. THE FORUM POST THAT STARTED THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE.What are you, a psychiatrist or psychologist? Unless you have advanced training and education in the area of human behavior, you are in no position to determine how much time it takes for a society of people to recover from a catastrophic and traumatic experience.
And I assume that you are white. So, if that is, in fact, the case, your experience and that of your ancestors has hardly anything in common with that of blacks.
Opposite of what happened to blacks, you and your forebears were not brainwashed to believe that your skin color, hair texture and facial features are ugly and destestable. The males were not made to be "breeding studs." The members of the group were not required to step off sidewalks to allow oncoming whites to walk past. They were not used as foot stools. The children were not sold away from their mamas. And I could go on.What is your experience in being a slave? What is your experience in having your children sold off? Everything you said happened but it didn't happen to you. If you want that to use as an excuse for criminal behavior be my guest, but don't be surprised when a jury or a judge doesn't buy the excuse.
For your information, I have plenty of experience in being what could be described as a quasi-slave or a person who has been frequently subjected to relentless discrimination in workplaces and even the U.S. Army, Rodney-King-style beatings at the hands of racist white police officers, "rules" that required me to go the back door and to sit in the back of buses, "racial profiling," and I could go on.
With all of the pain that I suffered at the hands of whites throughout most of the 65 years of my life on this planet, it is only because of the grace of God that I did not become an angry, embittered, violent and vicious criminal.
On the other hand, however, a great many blacks -- especially many of those whose skin complexions are not as light as mine is and who did not have parents who were as sensible, strong and stable as mine were -- have fallen prey to the adverse kinds of behavior that grew out of slavery and the subsequent forms of cruel and inhumane treatment that followed the end of that institution.Find any anger in anything he's written. I'd love to see it. All I've seen so far is completely civil and clearly articulated replies addressing the capaciously absurd garbage that is being posted on here by people.
His first post is evidence of his anger, eloquent yes, but very angry.
And you don't think Leretseh shows a lot of anger and hatred in his posts?
Yes I do, and just like feenix he is entitled to it. As long as that anger stays on this forum its good, once it leaves and goes to the streets then you better be able to back yourself. If not it could end very badly for either one of them.
How so is he entitled to it?
To be entitled to anger you must be justified, paranoia doesn't count.Don't over-think it man, it will just drive you nuts.
There is no over thinking here, I like some black people and dislike some. Its very simple, I like some white people and dislike some. I like honest people, people who do the right thing. I dislike those who constantly look for someone else to blame for their lot in life.
They always say that it is paranoia, but that is what they want. Seriously, anybody who says, "You are paranoid," is just one of their tools. It isn't paranoia if they are out to get you.
You should quit while you are ahead because your slip is showing.
There is absolutely nothing wrong with a black man being angry. It is just that you are obviously one of those people who believes that blacks are supposed to always act happy and have big wide grins on their faces and constantly be doing Bojangles-style tap-dance routines.I,m a racist then, fine job. You will always have that card to play.
I have not played the "race card" yet. When I do, you'll know it.
Then so be it. I have played the "race card" and I own it. That must be true because you, One Who Knows, said it.
I doubt it. That would take some level of reading comprehension on his part.
Look, I am angry about a lot of things and that is not a bad thing at all. Anger can work to one's advantage when he uses it as fuel to do constructive and productive things.
This is an area I have struggled with for many years.
I am 63. If I had lived as a black man in America, I think I would have become bitter and angry. Not necessarily criminal, but definitely radical.
So the question I keep asking myself is the obvious one: why am I less radical now? I don't have a great answer - not my dog in the fight doesn't cut it. I could say that in a legal sense I have no standing, but I don't really like that excuse either.
I detest injustice, but that's easy enough for someone who has never experienced it first hand, isn't it? I don't like the "white guilt" path either, but I can't help feeing some of that. I feel that I don't do enough, but that thought confuses me too.
I feel the same angst over homosexuals. I can't walk in their shoes, but if I had, I suspect I'd be nasty and vituperative.
I am not looking for an answer, of course. There is no answer. We are what we are and we do what we do.We face it. All of us. We keep looking at the problem, and try to understand as best we can from all possible angles. We talk to each other. We study. We have empathy. We have patience. We try to fix what can be fixed. We trust in the better parts of humanity to triumph. And we knock down those who would send us backwards into times of evil and wrong; exposing the OP and his cohorts is a tiny part of that, IMO.
Though I may disagree with the intensity of your point, I do not disagree with much of its substance. I wonder about the consequences of the welfare state and how that has affected lower income Blacks. Here in Indianapolis, Madame C.J. Walker had quite the beauty product empire becoming the wealthiest Black woman in America, perhaps in the world. One must wonder if the separation imposed by American post-Civil War society fostered a fierce independence and self determination.
There was a separate economy for Blacks in segregated communities. That separate economy helped establish some very successful businesses. When "equality" came - after lengthy struggles, many of those businesses failed because they were not as large or wealthy as the previously white only businesses that were now also set free.
Some people fail to see that racial prejudice destroys both perpetrator and victim.
Liberals bristle when they read or hear the words "white guilt" but I think it is more sophisticated than just that. The liberal views all people as infants reserving a special kind of infantilization for Blacks and women.My only reaction to what you wrote, my good friend, is Amen.
That's not my experience!
More often the right wing radical who treats blacks and women in such a way.As usual, you don't know a single thing about what liberals think.
Then tell us what it is liberals think, democrat policies sure lean toward a belief that certain groups are incapable of caring for themselves.
Or so you interpret them.
I think that some people need a helping hand. I don't think of them as infants, I think of them as unlucky or handicapped in some way - disease, age, circumstance. I don't think we just let people live out miserable lives because certain folks are too cheap to let loose of their wallets.
I think children who grow up in poverty are more likely to beget another generation that does the same. I know you can certainly argue that children who grow up under public assistance may go on to do the same, but at least they grew up healthier and had more opportunities to succeed.
No doubt you'll also argue that there is fraud and of course there is. I don't care: we can afford some fraud. I don't mean that we should just turn a blind eye, but I do mean that I'll accept it rather than hurting those that really need it.
Can we do better? Yes, and I'm always in favor of learning from our mistakes. I'd like to find more ways to eliminate poverty. I don't really care what it costs because poverty costs us dearly in crime, wasted lives and lost opportunities.
I'm never in favor of turning my back and letting the disadvantaged fend for themselves. Is there waste? Yes, but we can afford it. Have there been mistakes? Yes, and there will be more. I don't care: any flawed attempt to help is better than shutting them out.
There: you've heard the real opinions of a real liberal. Nothing about infants. Just genuine compassion for those who have fallen through the cracks.We have had a very long war on poverty and it hasn't accomplished a thing. There is still poverty and as long as we subsidize it it will be there. If you really want to help someone out of poverty create an environment where they can succeed, just taking from some to give to another has not worked and it will not work. How many more years of proof do liberals need?
How is someone suppose to succeed if they have nothing?
Yes, a very few can. Most cannot. Ignoring them is the wrong answer.
Create an environment where they can succeed? Absolutely. That starts with food, health and shelter, doesn't it?Again I ask, how much proof do you need that it isn't working? And how many more Trillions of dollars do we need to be in debt before you realize that we can't afford it?
We CAN afford it.
That's a constant lie from Conservatives. What we can't afford is wars that nobody wants to pay for except by cutting social programs.We lost the war but we should continue to fight it? I just don't understand liberal logic.
Ya see, you and I are not the polar opposites that you seem to think.
I agree 100% with what you wrote. The primary thing that has come out of the so-called War on Poverty that began in late 1960's is generation-after-generation of people who are unable to, and who refuse to, help themselves -- because they have been psychologically conditioned to depend on government for nearly every aspect of their lives.I never thought we were polar opposites, I just said you are angry. I still think that.
So stipulated. I am a very angry man and I do not mind being that way at all. My anger is a trait that has kept me from being mauled or killed, and that has driven me to achieve some very significant things in life.
Good for you, as long as your anger doesn't effect me then your streak will last.
I would agree that is not a desirable thing.
Either is turning your back on them and leaving them to sink or swim.
Just because we lost a war doesn't mean we should not have fought it.No. It may mean we need to change tactics, but you just want to close your wallet and your eyes.
Its my wallet not yours, you have no claim to my money. The only way you could take it is through force, is that what you condone?
But you'll quite happily drive along roads that Pcunix's taxes have paid for!
I will happily drive along roads my taxes have paid for too. The interesting thing about those roads is they lead somewhere, the only place the war on poverty leads is more poverty.
As usual, the point fly's straight past you! Would you refuse to take a helping hand off the government if life dealt you a bad deal, or would you welcome getting back a bit of the money you had paid in?
I'm sorry, your point did fly right past me. And somehow, I will survive.
And where did doing nothing lead to?
Read some history. Conservatives - they just love the past, but they never know any history,You are quite wrong. I am a stone-cold, hardcore, unrelenting conservative and I have broad knowledge of both U.S. and world history.
Yeah, right. Then tell us how well things worked out for society before we had welfare programs? Tell us about the epidemics and the dead bodies in the streets.
Tell us about debtors prisons. Tell us about all the wonderful things that caused us to create these programs.How about you tell us about the epidemics and dead bodies in the streets, tell us about the hell on earth before welfare came to be.
Did welfare programs stop the worst epidemic ever to hit this country, HIV-AIDS?
Did those programs stop the "crack epidemic?" Did those programs keep large numbers of young boys and young girls from making babies out of wedlock?
And speaking of "dead bodies in the streets," did the welfare programs stop all of the deadly drive-by shootings and bloody gang wars that are presently taking place in the ghettos and barrios?
Did welfare programs keep thousands of today's parents from abusing and abandoning their children?
Did welfare programs keep a situation from arising in which a huge number of today's teenagers cannot read and write?Actually, liberal good intentions have never solved a single problem, but they have bled this country dry. Why we keep listening to those who say we lost the war but we should keep fighting is beyond me.
Debtors prisons? Really when in US History were debtors prisons common? You may be confusing Dickens with history.
I kept waiting on the history lesson, I guess he had to tend to one of his successful businesses.
Until around 1830 something if I remember correctly. But as I said, you know nothing about history. Not my job to educate you.
1830, really, the welfare state dates to 1830? You used debtor prison to bolster the idea that the welfare system is a benefit and that conservatives don't know history. Then use the term "if I remember correctly."
You are an endless source of entertainment.You continue to demonstrate your ignorance of history. Yes, welfare reform began in the 1800's and abolishment of debtor prisons in the 1830's was part of that.
Your precious money has been used to help the poor and disadvantaged. You hate that, that says a lot about you, doesn't it?Keep going. The laughs never stop as long as you pretend you know anything about me.
Laugh if you will. The evidence of your ignorance of history is right here in your own words.
Have fun.I'm not sure what he is going on about, the welfare system in this country in its earliest form dates to the 1930's. But like you said he is entertaining.
So the attack becomes personal. It isn't the idea that there were no federal social welfare programs in existence before FDR and the 1930, it is that I personally must just hate - HATE - that money is used to help the poor.
(By the way = a side note - my money is used to construct a giant, distant federal government whose sole contact with the poor is through a giant, unwieldy and dispassionate web of over duplicated, inefficient and wasteful bureaucracies. My money goes to manufacture petty bureaucratic fiefdoms, not to help the poor. My church does a much more efficient job of that.)
The personal attack rather than the fact. Or at least a spirited defense of the welfare state accomplishing something that only slavery has done before it - rip Black families to pieces and destroy their new and growing economic clout. The public school system and the welfare state have been successful in doing what the Klan could not, render many Blacks ignorant and return as many as possible to the plantation.
Bravo, liberals, you should be proud. The destruction of poor Blacks is nearly complete. Perhaps the next thing should be actual ghettos of public housing - oops you did that already. Maybe making poor Blacks dependent on you for food - oops been done. Transportation, clothing, medical care - there it is medical care is the newest public welfare disaster looming.
Once the poor, especially the urban, Black poor are dependent on liberal welfare for everything paradise will reign, at least the liberal politician's paradise of never ending terms, perks, kickbacks, insider trading and control over the future of a vast bloc of poor, poorly educated and dependent voters.
If you wish to characterize me as a hater than get it right. I hate the tyranny of liberalism, the unrelenting and unrepentant reduction of beautiful and talented humanity to chattel for the never ending liberal political machine that likes to grind Black people up for political fuel.
How is stripping a man of his potential not worthy of hate. I hate what liberals would do to everyone else, transform them into pathetic wards of a failing welfare state. Liberalism reduces the individual and that I hate.
(Oh and look, very little about you personally, that is how it can be done)
That's what it's all about, isn't it? Your precious money.
Yeah, why not? I know the answer to this question already but what amount do you give to charities every year. It doesn't have to be an exact dollar figure, just an idea.
The road to hell is paved with good intentions, as they say.
The truth is, the "War on Poverty" should never have been fought. Prior to the mid-1960's, poor people were doing just fine in this country with many of them "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps."
As a matter fact, from 1865 (the last year of slavery) to 1955, and without any huge government-assistance programs or affirmative-action and equal-employment-opportunity regulations in place, black society made one of the greatest comebacks in history.
That is true because in 1865, the vast majority of blacks could not read and write, very few had marketable skills and nearly all of them were flat broke. However, by 1955, there was a sizable and continually-growing black middle class, the majority of blacks could read and write, the group was increasing its average level of education by leaps and bounds, and a great many blacks had achieved fortune and fame in a broad range of fields with many more poised to joined them.
And, similar to what I stated before, all of that was accomplished without any significant helping hands from government. Almost all of that progress was achieved by blacks "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps."
If the socialistic liberals of the 1960's had not been so bent on building heaven on earth or establishing a Utopia, America would be far better off today than it is.I think it was a little more diabolical than building a Utopia.
I agree. They were actually attempting turn America into a communist state.
Oh, right. Sure.. I'm a commie. A commie that has owned three capitalist businesses and has paid more taxes than many disadvantaged people will ever earn as income. A commie - that's me!
Good night. I'm done with this foolishness for now.I live in New York City and there are plenty of Russian immigrants here who still embrace the communist beliefs of the old Soviet Union.
However, many of them are some of the most enterprising people I have ever seen. They own a whole lot of businesses and are always looking for new money-making opportunities.
Additionally, there are plenty of "capitalistically-wealthy folks" in this country who have strong communist leanings.
"The truth is, the "War on Poverty" should never have been fought. Prior to the mid-1960's, poor people were doing just fine in this country with many of them "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps."
Unrealistic fanatasy scenarios.
Can you plant and raise a crop in the South Side of Chicago or in East New York Brooklyn? Welfare programs are needed to keep some people alive. It helps others to "pull themselves up by their own bootstraps." Welfare programs are Government programs. You do not pay for them out of your tax money. Your tax money goes to paying the taxes you owe. We have elected government representatives that run our government with sense of responsibility regular folks don't have.
Are you aware that in those good ole days between 1865 and 1955; whole towns full of successfull black people; were burned to the ground and the Black people murdered? In your good ole days Blacks that were successful, got away with their lives because they were high yella or lucky enough to stay one step ahead of a lynch mob.We don't pay for welfare out of our taxes? Where does the government get the money then? Is there something they produce and sell that earns money? Please tell me where the money comes from.
The government revenues from tax "Payments", bonds, land leases and fees and other forms of income is the Governments revenue to spend as our representatives see fit.
IT IS NOT YOUR MONEY BEING SPENT TO FUND WELFARE. Your money was spent to pay your tax dept. If you want to control how the government spends the governments money; run for Congress!You're reasoning is, nevermind, its not reasoning at all. Do you really believe anyone anywhere buys that load of BS? Really? By the way, I do determine how the money is spent by voting, voting get it. No, I'm sure you don't
Look, I was born and raised in a ghetto (South-Central L.A.) and I live in one today (East Harlem, NYC). And it is quite obvious to me that the only thing you know about "'hoods" is what you have read about them and what you have seen about them on TV.
For one thing, the vast majority of the people who live in such areas as the South Side of Chicago and East New York are employed and self-reliant. And so far as the ones who are receiving such assistance as welfare payments and food stamps, they are not starving and desperate people. In a great many cases, they are able-bodied people who are down on their luck at this point in time and only on welfare temporarily. And then there is the relatively-small minority that will be on welfare for the rest of their lives.
Also, during the "turn of the century," the "whole towns full of successful black people" that got burned down by whites happened on only about two or three occasions; whereas, today, black thugs are robbing, raping and killing "successful black people" every day or 365 days a year.
And so far as what you said about the "high yella" thing and blacks being "one step ahead of a lynch mob," I am not even going to dignify that with a response. I will just say that it is obvious that you have gained all of your knowledge about the "black experience" from such mediums as Hollywood movies, left-wing text books and documentaries, and emotion-charged novels.You may be right about the books. I read way too many books on my stomp in Bed-Stuy.(where I grew up 54 years ago.)
That high yella statement was really out of line.
But, I don't know the history of LA. Here in New York; we had a Governor that dumped thousands of people into the street. These people came from Mental institutions because of budget cuts. Nobody wanted to pay their fair share of taxes.So, these people were dumped on the streets and had no hope of learning a trade and making a living. They may be on welfare until they die. Some of these people had children. And those children had no home training or education needed to earn a living. They may be on welfare until they die. In New York State Prisons; 8 out of 10 cells has a Black or Hispanic Man in it. These people come home as felons. Some of them end up on welfare for the rest of their lives. I think there are alot of people in alot of different circumstances that will prevent them from "pulling themselves up from their bootstraps". What else is left for these people in bad circumstances besides welfare. What can we do with these people?I apologize for getting out of line with you. I did not realize that we are from the same "tribe."
Anyway, when it comes to your comment, I know exactly where you are coming from. I saw what happened here in NY with my own eyes; hundreds of troubled people kicked out of Creedmoor, poor women with children warehoused in filthy and dangerous shelters for the homeless, and all of the blacks and Hispanics who are being sentenced to long stretches in prison for what are actually minor drug offenses.
I broadly agree with what you say, except, speaking from a UK perspective it was not the liberals or left wing that were responsible for welfare benefits.
It was a tool of the right wing capitalists intent on suppressing revolution (a hungry man is an angry man) and opposed by the left wing socialists who saw it for what it was, a very crude tool to keep the working man in his place.
There are some people for whom it is a positive thing, the elderly and infirm, but mostly it is just a tool for keeping wages down and people, black or white, in their place.Let's expand the history lesson. No other minority community, with the exception of Eastern European Jews, has ever gained more economic equality faster than Blacks once government enforced segregation in education ended. Desegregation of education was enforced by a Republican sending troops to protect Black student access to public schools.
The opposition to desegregation - Democrats - "great" men like Robert Byrd, William J. Fullbright and Albert Gore Sr. - "great" leaders of a "great" party.
No other minority community has suffered the destruction of the family more than poor Blacks with the institution of the welfare state under that "great" humanitarian and champion of racial equality - Lyndon Johnson.
The liberal treatment of Blacks as infants has confined multiple generations of Blacks to the government preserve. When confronted with the absurdity of the welfare state liberals weave a tapestry of horrors. It is as if the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse road freely through the world until they, the enlightened, atheist, liberal, Marxists and "educated" elitists rescued us all from misery, passed their hands across the surface of the world and created a paradise for us all.
Oh thank you liberals, creators of paradise, where do I make my burnt offerings? Right next to the ash heap of history to which liberalism must be tossed if humanity is to actually progress?
That's not fair UCW, I'm not a liberal (although I know in the US I would be defined as that) Liberals view people as equals, not infants.
I don't know if you realize that openly racist laws in the US were still being passed some 50 years ago, and many people who were born during that time are still alive.
Don't get me wrong: everyone has a right to be a racist, but making racism a part of law is completely inexcusable.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Feenix , While I agree with you , and your insight is fully required here and now! There is no canceling out history ! Thats a fact . Todays America has never before experienced such openess in media or I should say , in truth ! Media is another story. The Truth is ,we have entered a new phase of our multi-cultural make -up! There will be , very shortly , no major race or ethnic majority in America ! So , then there will be no one to blame for the continuation of cultural divides in America. what and who then, do we blame poverty , hunger and disproportional wealth on then? The water ? I have seen racial divide here in America today! But its always influenced by other realities, drugs , alcohol, poverty! Where do we begin my friend ? Bring it on!
ahorseback,
You wrote, "...The Truth is ,we have entered a new phase of our multi-cultural make -up! There will be, very shortly, no major race or ethnic majority in America! ..."
First, I disagree with that. The nation is nowhere close to being a place in which there will be "no major race or ethnic majority." Whites will account for the majority for years and years to come. And that is true because in the future, many members of the groups that are presently classified as Hispanics and Asians will be "common everyday white people" in the future -- similar to the way that such groups as Italians, Greeks and Jews ended up being "common everyday white people."
Also, as I alluded to before, blacks' disproportionately-high rate of violent crime is rooted in the hundreds of years of cruel and humane treatment that their society was subjected to.
Well, one of those roots is blacks being brainwashed for hundreds of years to hate themselves for being black and to believe that they are inferior to whites.
What I am driving at is blacks' disproportionately-high rate of violent crime will not cease to exist until blacks shed their feelings of self-hatred and inferiority. And in order for that to come about, there will have to be a new order of so-called black leadership that will work 24/7 to steer large numbers of blacks away from those feelings.What in the hell are you talking about? Have you been imbibing?
You remind me of Newt Feenix you can be left, right for and against what ever shines a light on you. the position you took here is out of character for you. It's like you are trying out for a hollywood role of someone who can identify with the concept of slavery and it's affect on the common African American. You being uncommon and a success. That's what the hell i'm talking about' are you imbibing?
So you are saying that the common Black person is a failure? Or are you saying they are incapable? Or are they just violent? Or ignorant?
I have known far more decent, generous, hard working, law abiding, intelligent and loving Black people than not, I wonder how uncommon those hundreds of people are. Isn't that the liberal trap? When looking for someone to coddle and protect don't liberals look at skin color first?
Because Feenix doesn't meet your definition of a Black man you heap criticism on him. Why? Because he isn't a failure - nice. Isn't that the essence of racism? To expect someone to be a failure because they are from a different race.You have never met me. You and I have never had a few beers with each other. We have never hung out together. You have never rolled with me. You did not grow up with me. You do not even know how tall I am or how much I weigh.
Thus, how dare you have the audacity to speak out on what my views are on the "black experience in America."
As a matter of fact, my having conservative views on social, economic and political issues largely grew out of the fact that throughout the time blacks have been in the Western Hemisphere, they have been treated like animals and been forced to occupy second-class status.
Another reason why I am a conservative is I am at war against the status quo.But surely conservatives are for the status quo!
You know, sort of "disposed to preserve existing conditions, institutions, etc., or to restore traditional ones, and to limit change".Look, I am an old-school-Black Panther-style conservative. Thus, when I say that I am at war against the status quo, I am saying that I am at war against all of the factions (including black ones as well as white ones) that are causing blacks to go right on thinking like slaves.
OK, thanks, I understand where you stand (I think).
American conservatism is not a status quo philosophy. It is an evolutionary, civilizational philosophy. The idea that a body of "enlightened" elites can more rationally determine the course of a nation or a culture rather than the accumulated knowledge and actions of the millions who belong to that nation or culture is a hall mark of "progressive" "thinking." American conservatism is considerably more complex than a knee jerk reaction against change but rather a reaction against changes imposed by some elite in the name of - oh pick one - progress, equality, the children, etc....
The American conservative thinks that the accumulated free actions of a free people are a better guarantor of progress than the actions of a powerful elite, be it political or cultural. The American conservative resists fad or fashion in government in favor of proscribe limits to government's power and scope.
The status quo of human history has been the concentration of power in the hands of elites who decide the course of civilization. The greatest progress humanity has made has been after the removal of the status quo and the establishment of limited government and the vesting of ultimate political authority in the people not the state. That is a conservative notion and not the status quo.uncorrectedvision, that was the most enlighten and intellectual thing written in this thread. Is that a quote from Tomas Jefferson? I never considered myself a conservative, but man, you make a REALLY strong argument for conversion. I'm going to save that post of yours
No Jefferson there. That is all me.
Show me a conservative who doesn't consider himself to be one of the elite.
Ha! You don't reckon you're better than us wishy washy liberals, scourge of the earth and all that is wholesome! Ha.
Hardly, I think you are wrong not inferior. There is a difference. When I look at my pay check or the callouses on my hands or the old work boots on my feet I am certain that no man is better than another. I feel the strain in my back and the cuts on my hands. I know where I live, who I am and what I do, I do not pretend that earthly paradise is just a Marxist revolution away.
The shackles of our shared humanity are not broken by investing power in the state or adhering to liberal notions. The shackles of our flawed humanity cannot be broken and we are better for it.
Can one be an elite of one? Isn't being an individual a kind of elitism? Aren't we all elitist, therefore?
If I prick you do you not bleed?
Uncorrectedvision, I was saying nothing to you, it was personal between Feenix and I. We have had dialog for a while now and he understand. I've tried to engage you before but you walked away. I'll try again another time, write now i'm explaining my post to him.
Look, uncorrectedvision is one of my good friends here on HubPages so he can jump into an exchange between you and me anytime he so pleases.
Furthermore, you do not have the authority to tell the contributors to this site when they can and when they cannot express their views.Feenix, your friend Uncorrectedvision by all means can express his views, but not my views, or imply I may mean something I didn't say. I didn't express disagreement, but wonder and surprize at your position on this site. You represent yourself as unique and unlike the common black man that blames slavery and racism for their station in life. Your friends and foes on hubpages that have read you may also think your post here is out of character for Feenix. Iam pleased to know you are not truly blind, I knew it all the time.
Public forum, public post, public comment. Private messages, private conversations are not called forums.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Feenix, And there it is ! The subtle bias of all races , my friend when we make statments like "common everyday white people " we are being all inclusive in our prejudging , And that ! adds to the fuel of division that some of the idiots of racism love. It is true that the make up of our population is becoming far more diverse as will as our attitudes ! I dissagree however when you say that the anger stems from centuries of abuse .Honestly , Are you an angry man because some of your ancestors may have been slaves ? Or am I because I was raised in a poor scotch -irish heritage where servitude and indentured labor was very common ? The origional poster here is pretty biased ! Isn't it up to us to straighten him and his forum posts out !
You're the one who has a problem with there being bias among human beings, not me.
Because I am nothing but a mere human being, I am as imperfect as they come. I have a whole truckload of character flaws that includes bias towards particular groups of people and irrational fear and suspicion of others.
And the experience of indentured Scots, Irish and Scotch-Irish has very little in common with the enslavement of black Africans.
Furthermore, when America was a union of English colonies, Georgia was the slave colony for Scots, Irish and Scotch-Irish. And following the end of the Revolutionary War, quite a few of the freed Scots, Irish and Scotch-Irish went on to become slave owners (Scarlet O'hara?). And that is the reason why such a large number of contemporary blacks, including myself, have Scotch and Irish last names.You are putting words in my mouth. I did not say anything about blacks being angry. In so many words, I said that black society has been badly damaged by slavery, discrimination and other forms of racism.
And, yes, I am an angry man. I am angered by all of the ignorance, naivete and idealistic ways of thinking that exists among the inhabitants of America.
Moreover, I AM angry over the cruel and inhumane ways in which my forebears were treated in this Hemisphere. And I am also angry over all of the ways in which I have been discriminated against by whites and slighted by them. It is just that I am not sitting around stewing in my anger and acting out in anti-social ways. I am getting even.
And now that I think about it, I have already gotten even.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Please , One thing I will give you here ! You are the victim ! Perhaps you feel that a bit too much. Listen slavery of blacks was very real , no one denies that ! Attrocities of unimaginable proportions inflicted upon races is wide spread in all of history. I was looking up geneology of my own family history and came across hand written notes allowing children of my family past , as near in modern history as the beginning of the early twentieth century to be indentured farm laborers ! In the nineteen twenties and thirties. And the pay scale , food ,room and board ,if available. My own Father was an indentured laborer , and yes he too is Scottish and the firsthand stories he told were no less horrible at times than written black history . I'll say this ...as long as we have a "victims" mentality , we will never rise above class warfare. Prejudiced attitudes thrive on ! No doult, and it knows many colors as well as none at all.
I am not a victim and never have I considered myself to be a victim.
And because I am a very learned man, I am well aware of what has taken place throughout the history of the world. However, just because such groups as the Armenians and Jews were enslaved and slaughtered, and your ancestors were treated cruelly, my feelings about the enslavement of blacks in the Western Hemisphere are not softened.
Have you ever told a Jew to get over his/her negative feelings about the Holocaust because many other groups have suffered the same kinds of atrocities that theirs did?Indentured servitude had a time limit, a light at the end of the tunnel. Not saying it was a picnic, but it was a contract entered into by both parties (albeit often out of desperation or worse on one side and manipulated and harshly enforced on the other just as often). Slavery was not a contract. And, in America, it was even worse than other places historically, because HERE, it wasn't just the individual that was a slave FOR LIFE, it was the whole family line. FOREVER. Not just the dude that got jumped and dragged across the Atlantic living out his life in misery until he dropped dead of exhaustion, but his kids, his grandkids, their kids and grandkids, forever. We can't even fathom what that had to be like to live as a reality. To brush that off as being even remotely similar to indentured servitude suggests you may need to do some more research.
feenix, Your first post is really disturbing and even disgusting! You imply, no mistake about it, that blacks are in their right to attack white people - because of their skin color. Then you unmistakably imply that white people should expect this behavior from your people to continue...for the next 150 years -- because of that slavery thing long ago.. You offer no apology for your people's behavior, which a ton of white people, including myself, would do if the perps were white and the victims were blacks. You sir,justified this thread here as a warning to white people to be on their guard for racist behavior from your people.
Listen feenix, I totally agree with lereseh's profile where he says your people demanded integration, not separation and autonomy, but integration. and you got it!! You got it from from white males, what you, your people, wanted! Your people are NOT victims. White people aren't doing you any wrong in America . You should strongly condemn all those black racism attacks against white people. STRONGLY. You've had opportunity to do it, and you wont! Very disturbing!
You've also exposed your white advocates here , like Shadesbreath, as complete hypocrites. Since they dont condemn your threading commentsWay to show your true colors. "Your people's behavior." Nice. That little gem illustrates the total distinction you hold between yourself and "his people." There's no America for you, only "Us" and "Them." And when did feenix get elected as official representative of THEM? (Feenix, were you aware you are the spokesman for blackness? I hope THEY sent you an email or something. Otherwise, this is awkward, isn't it? US sitting here expecting your apology right now.)
First off, there is ZERO evidence in this thread for any black racist anything, and your selective reading and glaring omissions won't change that. Everything you say here is just you jumping up and down, waving your arms to the world shouting, "Hey, I am totally racist, please pay attention to me."
And I am not a "white" advocate. It has nothing to do with me being white. It has to do with me being literate and capable of having a thought in my head that is not driven by ignorance, blindness or idiocy. You, however, are going to read what he wrote and see what you want, and worse, probably can't see what he really wrote because I doubt you have the breadth of study to grasp it. Explaining how social currents work on the scale of those set in motion by 300 or so years of slavery, broken families, lost lineage, lost nationality, lost spiritual continuity, lost historical continuity, lost lots of stuff is far too complex, particularly for someone with no interest in understanding how it works (or the capacity to grasp it, perhaps).
Frankly, its actually more fun for me to think of you living in ignorance and fear. I hope you really do think black people are out to get you. I can imagine your fear every time you see one of THEM, dark and sinister, getting out of a car or walking down the street. Looking at you. Probably planning to come beat you down. Planning to have sex with your milky white women. Ewww... how horrifying. That dark brown body crawling all over alabaster flesh that should be held sacred just for you ... sinewy blackness defiling your wimmins right after kicking your ass.
You deserve your fear. It's the price you pay for perpetuating it.First, who in the hell are "my people?" I am a born-and-bred citizen of the United States of America, so when you say "my people" (implying that only blacks are my people), it demonstrates that you are one who believes that I, as a one of your fellow Americans, am not "one of YOUR people." In your way of thinking, only other whites are "your people."
And you put words in my mouth. Nowhere did I say that black thugs and criminals are justified in carrying out their evil deeds. I merely pointed out that, in a great many cases, there are certain dynamics behind their anti-social behavior.
And please get this into your head: I do NOT give a damn about how whites treat me in this country. I do not have the time to think about anything like that because I am too busy staying on top and maintaining my status as a "one-percenter."
Additionally, it is quite obvious that you have not read any of my posts. If you had, you would be well aware that I am strictly opposed to such things as law-enforced and court-ordered desegregation and affirmative action. Personally, I could not care less about intermingling with whites, and there are plenty of other blacks who hold the same attitude as mine.Based on your logic, you as a white man owe an apology to Jews for the actions of Adolf Hitler and the other Nazis. And you also owe an apology to American Indians for the actions of all of the whites who slaughtered them, stole their land and confined them to reservations. And you owe an apology to blacks for all of the actions of the slave drivers, enforcers of "Jim Crow" laws and Grand Wizards of the Ku Klux Klan.
The more you write, the more patronizing and bigotted towards blacks you become.First, you know I wasn't trying to be disrespectful by say "your people". I meant your racial group.
You are sooo wrong with your logic. Americans(which included blacks) fought to end a worst racist ideology in human history. Why should I apologize for what another country did - another people -did? No way.
Whether i like it , or you like it ,dude, slavery was perfectly legal up till 1865. Many blacks took advantage of the slavery laws and bought slaves for themselves. (99% of Americans WERE N OT slave holders!) Slavery extended as far back as history is written. I hope I would NOT have been supportive of slavery if I lived when it was legal. I hope I would think like Madison. no apology is needed today for slavery. It was what it was. It ended and blacks were free. You ,your racial group, wanted integration and your racial group got what it wanted. What in the heck is WRONG with seeing like that dude? Stop trying to create victim status for your race. I have never seen a black disrespected because of his/her race. I have never treated anyone of a different race disrespectfully because of race. I don't want white people treated disrespectfully. I see a problem and I voicing MY CONCERN
Finally, if I were you I would have said this: "I am black and am personally offended by what I see fellow blacks doing to white people, for no reason other that race. The very thing African Americans complained of prior to the 1960s. I hope it stops NOW. and if it doesn't then federal attention is NEEDED. "
That's what I would like to see from you dude. A little compassion for the victims of clear racial assaults by blacks.Check it out. You are not one of my homeys, so do not ever call me "dude" again.
And your comment is so convuluted and contains so much rambling that when I attempted to read it, it nearly made my head spin.
And besides, it is quite obvious that the point I made in my comment flew way over your head.
ahorseback, Telling blacks they're victims is encouraging violence against white people. unmistakeably!. And this from someone who lives all the way up there in N. New England, way out of harms way - no chance getting a beatdown because of the color of his skin. Yeah, old guy, you sure are BRAVE. Slavery is WAY OVER WITH OLD GUY. Stop provoking blacks to attack white people. All the way up there is your safe white community. You make me so mad dude
Do you think you could manage a reply without constant and petty insults?
They do your case no good at all.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
Taylor , If you were a mature individual , you would understand a couple of things, First that here where I live many a Young man has had to go tell mommy some old man just kicked his young and arrogant ass! Second My point is that to justify this violence by using the slavery issue as Feenix does ,is Immature and implies that slavery is simply an American history perpetrated by Americans only , ! Read all your history! Not just the parts you enjoy! Third I say he acts out the victim part by using this slavery issue , act a victim , be a victim. And sir ,if you can't handle the environment you help to create in the hood , get out! Mob violence is violence still , generally perpetrated for no rhyme or reason. Criminal acts performed by criminal minds.
thats a slightly veiled threat. Are you Yankees getting angry with each other?
Wow, I laughed when I read "you Yankees" for a moment I thought you were from Britain. Then I read your profile and saw that you were from Texas. Yankee is a funny word.
A sensible Brit would never make such a stupid comment.
- ahorsebackposted 12 years ago0
And Taylor , Racism is racism ,it works in many ways , straight across the board and in reverse as well. Being young and Idealist as you seem to be is no excuse.
Uncorrectedvision, on this public forum this comment is for you only and I addressed you only. Now anybody can read your mail but nobody should answer for you unless you give them power of attorney as Feenix gave you.
@Feenix, please tell us how welfare programs led to the social ills you describe. Please explain how by omitting welfare programs, these dreadful social evils would have been avoided. I am completely baffled by your point. Are you suggesting that by helping those in need, by trying to counter the balance, we have made society worse? Are you suggesting that by not helping, society would have been healthier?
You are putting words in my mouth. Nowhere did I say that welfare programs caused any of the problems that I mentioned.
I merely stated that the welfare programs did not keep them from happening.
And putting words in an opponent's mouth is one of the oldest tricks in the art of debating, but I am too seasoned to fall for that. So, please, do not try to run that game on me again.I didn't mean to put words in your mouth. I apologize if that's how it came across. I actually did not see you as an opponent. As for using an old trick, trust me, if I'd have been of the mind, I would have attacked you, subtly and otherwise. I agree with many of the things you say, but, I was completely confused by your statement, I still am. Welfare programs may not have prevented all the terrible things that have happened, but I don't believe they have led to them. How could eliminating welfare, have made things better? I don't get it! Truly.
You're right about one thing, you don't get.
Repairguy47, spoken like a true scholar! Your input is massive, inspirational and will no doubt add so much to the conversation. *yawns*
Ok love, if that makes you feel better.
You seem like a very nice person so I apologize for coming down on you the way I did.
Please research the comments that preceded mine and you will find the one I was responding to and possibly learn the reason why I responded in the manner I did.No problem, honestly it wasn't that harsh. I did read them, but I have to be honest and admit I'm a Brit, so there's a whole load of American history that I may have read about, but have have not experienced. I know this makes a difference. I am of the opinion that people should be enabled. But, I think we have to be honest about the past. I completely understood your comments re :anger. I'm angry, not as a black woman, but as a woman. It's really interesting though, when I mention the word feminist: reaction!!
Let us start all over again. First, I am very pleased to have made your acquainatance. Second, I am sure that you and I will end up being real good friends here on HubPages.
I'm very pleased to have made your acquaintance, too. I'm also sure we will also end up being real good friends.
"The truth is, the "War on Poverty" should never have been fought. Prior to the mid-1960's, poor people were doing just fine in this country with many of them "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps."
Feenix, on what data do you base that conclusion?Because he wants it to be true. That's all that matters in conservative "made up history".
When I mentioned debtors prisons, they thought that only happened in England. When I mentioned welfare programs, they all insisted that none of that ever existed until recently. But they are all "well versed" in history :-)
And of course they always do the "charity is all we need" bit, which of course is exactly why Federal and State programs were instituted: charity did not work.
We all know what it's really about: their wallets.Jeff Berndt wrote:
"The truth is, the "War on Poverty" should never have been fought. Prior to the mid-1960's, poor people were doing just fine in this country with many of them "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps."
Feenix, on what data do you base that conclusion?
From feenix:
Look, when it comes to taking a long hard look at all of blacks' serious social and economic problems, bean counting and what is written in various literary works do not come anywhere close to describing what is actually happening.
I know exactly what is happening because, for many years, I have been watching the situation unfold with my own eyes. My views on what is taking place in "Black America" is not based on what I learned in college, read in books or saw on PBS documentaries. It is based on plenty of first-hand knowledge.
First, prior to such left-wing, socialistic-communistic undertakings as the Civil Rights Movement and War on Poverty, America's black society was elevating its status non-stop and at warp speed. By 1955 and without receiving any massive government assistance, blacks had established numerous clean and orderly communities all over the country -- even most of the so-called ghettos were good places in which to raise children and run businesses -- and opposite of what is the case today, there were not any such things as drive-by shootings, carjackings and heavy drug dealing in even the poorest of black neighborhoods.
Back in 1955, things were continually improving for blacks because most of them had begun to break away from the "unliberated" ways of thinking that had been instilled into them through slavery and such other cruel and inhumane treatment as "Jim Crow" laws and practices.
By the mid-1950's, much of black society had developed a strong sense of self-determination and self-reliance, and relatively few looked to government to "help them out."
However, enter the Civil Rights Movement which began in 1955, followed by the War on Poverty which was kicked off in the late 1960's.
The truth is, the Civil Rights Movement was an updated version of what took place on slave plantations. The public demonstrations, sit-ins, marches and boycotts that fueled that movement were nothing more than present-day examples of blacks pleading with the "Great White Masters" to cut them a little slack and to allow them to move into the "Big House" with them.
So far as the War on Poverty, it was nothing more than a present-day version of the "Great White Masters" in Washington and other high places tossing blacks a few scraps. And causing matters to be even worse, all of the handout programs that were set into motion by that "war" served to sap blacks, as well as many others, of their will be to be self-reliant and to seek ways to pull themselves up through their own hard work and other efforts.
In summation, the Civil Rights Movement and War on Poverty returned a great many blacks right back to thinking like slaves, and being just as dependent on the actions and goodwill of the "Great White Masters" as their enslaved forebears were forced to be.
Finally, I must say it is not I who is unaware of history. The ones who are unaware of history, and its many dynamics, are all of the liberals whose "knowledge" has grown out of such things as left-wing propaganda, distortions and what could be described as revised history.Funny how the right never own to propaganda, distortions and revised history!
From where I sit I see plenty of that. But still I suppose that's OK, the right wing is always right isn't it?Look, I have been living for more that six decades, so I am well aware that no one group of people has a monopoly on doing such things as spreading propaganda, revising history and distorting things.
However, because one of the objectives of my comment was to be critical of liberals, I mentioned only them when it comes to a set of character flaws that all groups of humans possess.
You are bright enough to know that I was not merely singling out liberals, but you just could not resist coming off in a smart-mouthed way.But you did single out liberals, if you hadn't you'd have said all groups distort etc, but you didn't.
Mind you, you do say that your object was to be critical of liberals, unlike many here who would rather be critical of distortion from whichever side.
I guess my smart mouthed way must be a product of the more than six generations that I've been around.I did not have to qualify what I said about liberals by saying something like, "As is true of all groups, liberals ... "
That would have taken the punch out of my comment.
And if you are an experienced writer, you are aware that writing an effective political commentary consists unapologetically criticizing the opposition.
Furthermore, based on what I have seen so far, you make a whole lot of sweeping statements about conservatives.I'm afraid that as far as I'm concerned an effective political commentary consists of a balanced criticism and not of broad sweeping statements, I leave that to Fox News. Note how your broad sweeping statement diverted from the topic.
I sometimes resort to sweeping statements to promote responses but generally try to be factual, I wonder what sweeping statements of mine you have in mind?I have my style of writing and you have yours -- and that's that.
Fine, as long as you accept that I will challenge some of your broad sweeping statements,as I am sure you may with any that I make.
Jeff Berndt (that's me) wrote:
"The truth is, the "War on Poverty" should never have been fought. Prior to the mid-1960's, poor people were doing just fine in this country with many of them "pulling themselves up by their own bootstraps."
Feenix, on what data do you base that conclusion?
feenix:Look, when it comes to taking a long hard look at all of blacks' serious social and economic problems, bean counting and what is written in various literary works do not come anywhere close to describing what is actually happening.
I know exactly what is happening because, for many years, I have been watching the situation unfold with my own eyes. My views on what is taking place in "Black America" is not based on what I learned in college, read in books or saw on PBS documentaries. It is based on plenty of first-hand knowledge.
Jeff:Well, bean-counting and other data might not match your own experience, but they do a better job of measuring broad trends than any one person's personal experience.
feenix:First, prior to such left-wing, socialistic-communistic undertakings as the Civil Rights Movement and War on Poverty, America's black society was elevating its status non-stop and at warp speed.
<snip>
However, enter the Civil Rights Movement which began in 1955, followed by the War on Poverty which was kicked off in the late 1960's.
The truth is, the Civil Rights Movement was an updated version of what took place on slave plantations. The public demonstrations, sit-ins, marches and boycotts that fueled that movement were nothing more than present-day examples of blacks pleading with the "Great White Masters" to cut them a little slack and to allow them to move into the "Big House" with them.
So far as the War on Poverty, it was nothing more than a present-day version of the "Great White Masters" in Washington and other high places tossing blacks a few scraps. And causing matters to be even worse, all of the handout programs that were set into motion by that "war" served to sap blacks, as well as many others, of their will be to be self-reliant and to seek ways to pull themselves up through their own hard work and other efforts.
Jeff: Well, I can't speak to whether the Civil Rights Movement made anybody feel like they didn't have to work to get by, but I can point at some data. In 1939, the average black man earned about 44% of what the average white man did. By 1959, the average black man earned 55% of what the average white man did. Improvement, yes, and before the Civil Rights Movement and the Great Society and so forth, which supports your theory. But. By 1979, the average black man earned about 68% of what the average white man did. That shows very little appreciable difference between the rate of black bootstrapping before the Civil Rights movement and After. If your theory were correct, I'd have expected the rate of bootstrapping to slow or stop following the civil rights era.
And the rate of economic rise is even better for black women compared to white women: as of 1939, black women earned 43% of a white woman's wage, by 1959, 59%, and by 1979, 99% (of course, there's also the issue of why women earn less than men but that's a separate issue--though probably related).
Since '79, the rate of improvement seems to have tapered off. I'm not sure why, but I would guess that it had to do with backlash from wealthy white folks who didn't much like the civil rights movement as much as it did with a return of a "slave mentality" brought on by it being illegal to force black people to ride at the back of the bus, to drink from separate drinking fountains, and not to buy homes in white neighborhoods.
(I got my statistics from here if you'd like to check them.)
So, the idea that the Civil Rights Act did more harm than good doesn't seem right to me. I could get on board with the theory that it did as much harm as good, or maybe that it didn't do much either way (neither harm nor good), but only for black men vs white men. It seems to have worked out really well for black women (leaving male-female equality out of the equation for a moment). But that's the bummer about stuff like this: we can't go back in time to not let the Civil Rights Movement happen to test the theories.
feenix: In summation, the Civil Rights Movement and War on Poverty returned a great many blacks right back to thinking like slaves, and being just as dependent on the actions and goodwill of the "Great White Masters" as their enslaved forebears were forced to be.
Jeff: Well, as I said before, I can't speculate as to how people feel, but the data don't seem to show that the Civil Rights Act caused a stagnation in the socio-economic rise of black people in America.
I mean, if I were to take my own experience only as a data point, the black folks in my circle of friends and colleagues are all college-educated professionals. My first boss after college was a black guy, and one of my current clients is a black executive. I could look at that set of statistically insignificant data, and conclude that racism no longer exists and that black people have achieved social and economic equality with white people in America. But I'd be wrong, wouldn't I?
feenix: Finally, I must say it is not I who is unaware of history. The ones who are unaware of history, and its many dynamics, are all of the liberals whose "knowledge" has grown out of such things as left-wing propaganda, distortions and what could be described as revised history.
Jeff: Heh, see, I love it when people tell their opponents that they don't know their history. In most cases, it's just different people focusing on different parts of history (and ignoring other bits of it, either on purpose or by mistake), and making logical conclusions based on what they know. And I've been guilty of it too, in my weaker moments, so, please don't think I'm setting myself up as some kind of saint.@Jeff Berndt,
I am well aware of all the statistics you mentioned in your comment, and I could cite quite a few others that demonstrate that America's black society has undergone a high degree of social and economic progress during the past 50 years of so.
However, one statistic that you failed to mention is in 1955, blacks' rate of poverty was about three times that of whites and today, it is still about three times that of whites.
You also failed to mention that in 1955, blacks' rate of unemployment was nearly three times the national average and today, it is still nearly three times the national average.
Furthermore, you failed to mention that back in the 1950's and before, there were no known cases of HIV-AIDS. However, today, there are a whole lot of known cases of HIV-AIDS and blacks are suffering and dying from that disease at an alarming and highly-disproportionate rate.
You also failed to mention that in the 1950's, about 80% of the black households with children were headed by married couples. But today, only about 25% of black households with children are headed by married couples -- and nearly 75% are headed by single females with the majority of them living in poverty.
Additionally, the rate of abortion for black females is seven times the rate of abortion for white females.
So, even though one can sight many statistics that blacks have made great progress in many areas during the past 50 years of so, the disparities between blacks and whites in some key economic areas remain the same and making matters worse, it appears that black society is in the throes of a moral breakdown.I am well aware of all the statistics you mentioned in your comment, and I could cite quite a few others that demonstrate that America's black society has undergone a high degree of social and economic progress during the past 50 years of so.
Okay, then we're on the same page so far.
However, one statistic that you failed to mention is in 1955, blacks' rate of poverty was about three times that of whites and today, it is still about three times that of whites.
Alright. How did the black poverty rate compare in 1935?
You also failed to mention that in 1955, blacks' rate of unemployment was nearly three times the national average and today, it is still nearly three times the national average.
Same question.
Before you can say the Civil Rights Act and welfare caused this, (or rather, before you can convince me that you might be right about it) you need to tell me what happened before, and compare it to what happened after.
Furthermore, you failed to mention that back in the 1950's and before, there were no known cases of HIV-AIDS. However, today, there are a whole lot of known cases of HIV-AIDS and blacks are suffering and dying from that disease at an alarming and highly-disproportionate rate.
You're right, before sometime in the 1970s, there were no known cases of HIV-AIDS. Are we to conclude that you believe that the Civil Rights Movement and the Welfare Act are somehow responsible for HIV-AIDS and/or it's disproportionate affect on the black community? If so, why do you believe this? If not, why did you bring it up?
You also failed to mention that in the 1950's, about 80% of the black households with children were headed by married couples. But today, only about 25% of black households with children are headed by married couples -- and nearly 75% are headed by single females with the majority of them living in poverty.
The divorce rate has gone up across the board, not just for black couples. In fact, the only group for which the divorce rate hasn't shot up over the last few decades has been gay people.
Additionally, the rate of abortion for black females is seven times the rate of abortion for white females.
Is that because black girls are more likely than white girls to have sex, or because they're more likely to have unprotected sex? Somehow, I don't think black girls are any more promiscuous than white girls.
So, even though one can sight many statistics that blacks have made great progress in many areas during the past 50 years of so, the disparities between blacks and whites in some key economic areas remain the same and making matters worse, it appears that black society is in the throes of a moral breakdown.
Oh, absolutely! Disparities do remain, and that's a problem. But I disagree (and don't think you've argued convincingly) that the existence of public assistance is the reason those disparities remain.Okay, I loss this one. Congratulations on your victory.
It's not a victory feenix, just a bunch of people trying to work out why the world isn't as it should be, and how it could be better, that's it.
Yeah. And half of them don't want to spend any money doing that.
Yep, that's true. I struggle with the conservative ideology. Not at the top table, I've got their agenda and number. But, sometimes, I also struggle with the conservative voter and feel that Marx was absolutely correct when he suggested that the working class were tricked into working against their own best interest.
This may make no sense to you Pcunix, as and American citizen, but I live in a working class area and every time I go to the local shop, I see someone who I know is unemployed, or a single parent, picking up a copy of the Daily Mail, or the Sun. I think, why on earth are you buying this garbage? There's usually a picture of a Muslim, or benefit cheat (more often than not a single parent) Princess Diana or a supposed Nazi. I feel my nation is completely brainwashed!I see the same thing and hear them repeating the nonsense they've learned from places like that or talk radio. It drives me mad.
You know, you could establish a foundation that would provide assistance and various services to the poor and disadvantaged. There is nothing stopping you from doing that.
In other words, do not just talk the talk. Start walking the walk.I think it is you that needs to wake up. The reason governments began working in these areas is because private efforts failed.
Now you may say that government has failed also, but I won't agree. We haven't net our goals, but we are helping people. Many people have escaped poverty because of government help. No enough, I absolutely agree. It's never enough as long as any remain and we are a long way from that.
The solution is not to cut welfare. The solution is to find better ways to help - whatever the cost.Show me some kinda sign.
Where does it say that government had to step in because families and non-governmental organizations could not effectively provide assistance to the needy?
And information and data provided by socialistic-communistic left-wing liberals does not count. And information and data provided by government does not count either.We agree here. To even attempt to claim that government needs to provide housing and benefits to the poor is to spew nonsense.
"Gang Leader for a Day" by Sudhir Venkatesh, and you'll see that government provided housing, etc, has done nothing but make the problems worse.
It's interesting stuff. The private sector didn't fail, the public did.
Hello, Hollie,
You are exactly right. I should not be looking at it as a win/lose situation. It is a matter of what can be done to make our world a better place.Hi feenix,
Exactly, we're kind of all on the same side, we just differ about the best route. One day we'll all get there.
That is the most honorable action a human being can make. Even if it is just a smile to a stranger.
No, you didn't lose this one. You were worn down over the course of several days by constantly refreshed ranks of opposition wielding conveniently selected "statistics" (with no sources, despite sources being demanded of you earlier) that were interpreted based on opinion and used to brush off inconvenient and complicated human truths that don't fit neatly into spreadsheets... or, for that matter, into forum debates where people who enjoy the luxury of education, literacy, and the disposable income with which to buy computers and Internet access that can then be used during leisure time, of which they have plenty, to pursue the bourgeois amusement of social dilettantism.
I don't claim to be excluded from that last category, but this whole conversation, if viewed from 30,000 feet, suggests that you did not lose at all."statistics" (with no sources, despite sources being demanded of you earlier)
Um, I cited my source.I don't know what it is. But citing sources regarding something that can easily be shown through sources that aren't inherently discriminatory seems to be a challenge on HubPages anymore.
If the source isn't inherently biased in the conversation, then sources are worth something."I don't know what it is. But citing sources regarding something that can easily be shown through sources that aren't inherently discriminatory seems to be a challenge on HubPages anymore."
I know, right? And folks say, "Cite a source," but if they disagree with the data, the source must be biased, or brainwashed, or too liberal, or too conservative, or whatever.
While it's important to check that a source doesn't have a political axe to grind, it's also not true that all data you happen not to like comes from a biased source.I know that when I talk economics, I easily dismiss government statistics. But I think I put up good arguments that suggest why I shouldn't.
We can talk about that later, but I am aware that it might seem that I'm doing the same thing.
No, feenix, you didn't lose anything, nor did I win. (Or at least, it doesn't look that way to me.)
See, there may be (there are) problems with government assistance/welfare/ADC/affirmative action/pick a government anti-poverty plan, and they ought to be identified and fixed. On that much, I think we're agreed.
Where I disagree with you is in your assertion that government anti-poverty plans cause poverty, or make it worse.
I further disagree with your idea that the Government in fact ought to do nothing to make it easier for someone born into poverty to become educated (either with a degree or with a skilled trade, or whatever) and be able to earn a better living than his or her parents were, and to ensure that the kid will have enough to eat while he or she is learning those skills. I think these are good and proper things for the government to be doing. This is probably our biggest disagreement.
Who thought that welfare was a recent thing? Who thought debtors prisons were only in England? You make stuff up as you go along?
Wow! This the raging crap! That needs to live planet earth. The hatred, is brutal!
Those who make or have more money than the other 99%. OWS,
According to the participants in the Occupy Wall Street movement, 99% of Americans are middle-class and poor people and one percent of them are rich people.
Seems to me the 1% should define the people running the world, and not the new rich.
Violent crime commited in the black (Negro) community is because, millions of Africans hundreds of years ago were cut off from their history. No other people in America have been cut off from their history of times before the United States, when they were greater people. Negros were and are indentified by color. I believe that any other millions of people of any color under the same circumstances would have ended up where the Negro is today, but only if their history was erased. It was Against the law to teach a slave to read and now the "Gangs of New York" is nationwide. The Negro was made in and by America and some Americans wonder why they are violent to each other.
Hey, junko, very well said. As they used to say back in the day, you ain't never lied.
@feenix - unfortunately I didn't read this entire thread because I picked it up when it started and hated it. Having read back to some of your posts, however, you seem intelligent, well read, informed so the comment below may be taken by you for whatever it's worth. It was written before I backtracked in the thread. Still don't understand why you condone junko's comment.
People cut off from their history several hundred years ago does not cause violent tendencies in today's culture, with all due respect. How does that justify black on black crime? How does it justify anything? How do you explain the millions? of blacks who are not violent but instead are educated, polite/kind, productive and not of the gang mentality? You made one small Freudian slip - "when they were greater people". It's this underlying perception that keeps a race stuck in a time unnecessarily. Time to stop this subconscious thought process and see blacks for what they are - vibrant, creative, intelligent, physically beautiful, and a viable part of the community. At least the ones who aren't still harping on that same old (albeit at one time valid) chestnut.
And you, feenix, why are you validating junko's insantity? If you really believe this, you're part of the problem and particularly disgusting because you are of the former generation. Stop passing on the hate to future generations. Remembering history is one thing. Trying to change it, relive it, make up for it, is impossible. Change your future by proving everyone wrong.Well, I guess junko and I will not be on your Christmas card list.
And thank you for calling me "digusting." No one has called me that in a long time, so I was beginning to think I am losing my touch.I'm glad you have a sense of humor. Maybe I misunderstood the whole thing.
Just got turned onto 'Detroit 187', a streamer on Netflix. Has some of the characters from The Wire
and The Sopranos, the two best shows ever made in America, and haven't watched much yet but looks pretty interesting. It is already canceled so must be good.@Couturepopcafe, It was not a freudian slip, about greater people. All american with the exception of Negros can think back to a time when they were greater people, Asian, Mexican, Native, European Americans etc. The American Negro is one of the only man made nation in a nation. Many have overcome but the majority have failed to overcome. I am not insane but if I was It would be understandable. How can you condone the treatment of the negro then and now. Are you not a learned man?
With respect, I don't condone that treatment of years ago and although it is said that violence begets violence, the violence of today is unrelated to that of years ago. It is misdirected. I don't know my ancestors any more than they do except for the country they came from, and that is only as far back as the elders remember. It's the same with blacks. They remember what was handed down through the generations. I understand that families were broken up and they may not have had the benefit of several generations but the bottome line is that what they know today was handed to them by their grandparents. If hate was handed down, they only know hate. Blacks also hold a double standard. The ones I know teach their children well, are good and kind people, then turn their backs and blame whites for everything. I wasn't there when the slaves were brought here. I could bring up the old story about their own tribes selling them off. But it's sad history and not worth repeating more than once. You talk about a man made nation within a nation and this in itself is devisive, perpetuating the worn out fight. In a way I don't blame anyone but I'm just tired of the whole thing. I'm not black. I can't ever know what the pain was, is. But violence is not the solution.
It's embarrassing to me when I see trashy white folks and it should be to you and whatever your race is too. But I try to give people the benefit of the doubt and understand that we are all victims/products of our environment. I allow for that up to the point where it effects me and mine. Everyone grows at their own pace. Some have more burden to bear. There is no justifying these kinds of violence.What kind of apparatus do you use to write your comments, a broom?
Why the witch comment? I'm just being forthright with an honest opinion.
Broom as in making sweeping statements -- not as in being a witch. I am quite certain that, as is the case with me, you are a very charming person when you are not on the attack.
I got a chuckle out of that one. You're right of course about sweeping comments. Do you really think I was that general/sweeping? I'd like you to pick at my comment for educational purposes if you would.
Unlike some of the people who are participating in this forum, I am not going to try to "teach" anyone anything or hand them the kinds of assignments that educators hand out to students.
The truth is, when writing in these forums, many of us make sweeping statements here and there. That is one of the shortcomings of being a mere human being. Not a one of us is perfect, nor do anyone of us always express ourselves "perfectly."
Yeah, but you have to pay for the sins of your fathers.
And it is quite obvious that you are paying, because you come off like a very unhappy person.I don't believe in paying for the sins of my fathers. If this were true, I'd be in some mafia hell hole. What I do believe is that we must individually make our own way in the world. Are these violent youths paying for the sins of their fathers? Do you see how this could not possibly apply?
I went back and read my comment to see if I could find where you could have interpreted it as being unhappy. I didn't find anything. I take care to choose my words carefully in these posts because I know how easy it is to misunderstand someone. I always try to maintain a positive perspective. Joyful even. Things are rarely obvious.I apologize for judging you as an "unhappy person." That was totally inappropriate and discourteous on my part.
And that is what I do not like about these forums about political and religious issues. They often cause some of the participants to put their mouths into gear before igniting their brains.I totally hear you. It makes me wonder about the issue we're talking about. If we get a bit out of control here, just writing about it, I can only dread what might happen if we were all confronted with the issue in a real mob. Heaven protect us.
Thanks for the apology. I'd want you on my side.
I don't believe in paying for the sins of my fathers. If this were true, I'd be in some mafia hell hole. What I do believe is that we must individually make our own way in the world.
Yeah, but see, it isn't as simple as that.
We white folks (I assume you're white like me, but I may be wrong) are certainly benefitting from the sins of our fathers (not our own literal fathers, but the centuries of white folks marginalizing* non-white folks). That means that we're really not making our own way in the world. We're benefiting from white privilege, whether we're actively engaged in perpetuating it or not. We have an advantage simply by being white because our forefathers made darn sure that nonwhite people couldn't fully participate in American democracy. We've tried to correct this injustice, but we're not finished.
It's also important to remember that it's not your fault, or mine, that this state of inequality exists. It was brought about long before we were born. But it is our responsibility to help correct it.
White folks like the 'gentleman' who started this thread like to point at black-on-white violence and call it evidence of 'reverse racism,' and pretend that it means that white folks are under attack and there's some kind of conspiracy to hush it up. Foolishness, and worse than foolishness. It's the kind of thing that allows white people to get comfortable with their privilege and imagine that it is somehow deserved or earned. It's neither.
There is no real equality in the US, economic, social, or otherwise. I wonder how such 'gentlemen' would react if they got a taste of real equality.
*I realize that "marginalizing" is an inadequate word, but it's all I could come up with to cover everything from genocide and slavery all the way up to casual, unconscious discrimination.I can agree with most of this in principle. It still doesn't justify this kind of mob violence, some of it on total strangers.
"It still doesn't justify this kind of mob violence, some of it on total strangers."
Of course not; I never suggested that it did.
Jeff, in my opinion, the comment above is the most intelligent and insightful one that has been contributed to this "exchange."
Thanks for the kind words, feenix. I just wish I (or someone, I don't care who) had better ideas for solving these problems. I have no idea what ought to be done besides be aware and try not to unwittingly perpetuate the problem.
Jeff B. :: "That means that we're really not making our own way in the world. We're benefiting from white privilege, whether we're actively engaged in perpetuating it or not. We have an advantage simply by being white because our forefathers made darn sure that nonwhite people couldn't fully participate in American democracy. We've tried to correct this injustice, but we're not finished."
Jeff, I've seen nothing but cookie-cutter arguments from you. The above paragraph I cite is a perfect example --and also a Gross misrepresentation (and disrespectful!) of America's GREAT past. White Christians did NOT owe integration rights to black males (pre 1964). After the Civil war, blacks were suppose to be a separate and self-reliant people. White people (and Booker T. Washington) all across America were committed to this moral pursuit --a pursuit also firmly grounded in historical legitimacy. Blacks were a free people after 1868 (14th Amendment), free to build their own cities, their own industries, or colonize a place in America's vast expanses of unsettled land (e.g. like the Mormons).
The structure of American society up until 1964 was consistent with the structure all societies in recorded human history (one male group creating and maintaining its political and economic arenas). I've pointed this out to you before Jeff, and for some reason, it just won't register . Between 1960 and 1964, Blacks pleaded for , then demanded, a societal anomaly (integration), and because white Christians are a generous and giving people, truly desiring to help the black race achieve more economic security, blacks received their demand (and much more!); and in so receiving it , they became the recipient of something no other male has ever received in human history ::integration rights into another male group's established society. Again, there was , and is, no constitutional right to integration. Blacks received a great and generous gift (i.e. across-the-board integration rights - Civil rights acts 1964, 65 & 68).
End of story Jeff. Stop trying to create victimization for blacks where none exists. There is no "legacy of slavery" , "no sins of white fathers" and no historical discrimination or racism , to justify black violence against white people today, nor to justify black failures in this 45-year-old compulsory integration experiment. Prior to 1964 black on white crime (which I've researched extensively) was very rare - almost immeasurable statically. It has since exploded into the stratosphere (metaphorically speaking). As Taylor pointed out - with a bona fide source - there were 580,000 violent crimes blacks committed against whites in 2005. Please (see Im trying to be nice) stop deliberately stirring the racial cauldron with irresponsible demagoguery.Man, you have one of worst cases of negrophobia I have ever seen.
And that begs a big question: How did you contract such a serious strain of that disorder? Did yo' mama get frightened by a negro while she was pregnant with you?Non Sequitur nonsense sir. I fear no man tho. I would fear a mob ...
You fear no man?
Pay a visit to my 'hood. There are hundreds of men here who would scare the hell out of you in a one-on-one situation.Hi Feenix,
This is why I did not want to give this thread anymore oxygen. S Leretseh is not renowned for his reasonable, just and balanced views re: race. He should be ignored. He is biased in the extreme and will find any argument to support his ignorance. We know better. Why give the man anymore attention?Yeah, the fact that he has only 14 followers after being on the network for 21 months is solid proof that hardly anyone pays him any attention.
Hi, Hollie,
This guy makes me feel like a cat who has just caught a mouse. I have this strong urge to toy around with him.I guess there are all kinds of comments someone can make and actions he can take that could keep a man from his destiny.
Ok, "negrophobia" may be the term of the day, but it just put Richard Prior in my head for the last fifteen minutes and so it is unlikely I will ever hear, "negrophobia" and not laugh.
I'm sure your kind will somehow fit into the language of some ridiculous bill authored by another self loathing white democrat.
It will, undoubtedly, be listed in the next revision of the MMPI.
"Man, you have one of worst cases of negrophobia I have ever seen."
Took you long enough to figure that out!
"-and also a Gross misrepresentation (and disrespectful!) of America's GREAT past."
No, it's a pretty fair representation of America's past. Yes, the US has done some great things. But the US has also done some very shameful things. The institution of slavery (which started long before the US existed, I know) as it came to be practiced in the American south is a much nastier version than most other versions of slavery in world history, and had a specific racial (racist) element that other versions of slavery did not.
"After the Civil war, blacks were suppose to be a separate and self-reliant people."
Supposed by whom?
"Blacks were a free people after 1868 (14th Amendment), free to build their own cities, their own industries, or colonize a place in America's vast expanses of unsettled land (e.g. like the Mormons)."
Yeah, sure. Until some white people decided they wanted that piece of ground. (And of course, that leaves aside the fact that in many cases, that "unsettled" ground had people living on it, but that's a different group of people the US screwed over.)
"The structure of American society up until 1964 was consistent with the structure all societies in recorded human history (one male group creating and maintaining its political and economic arenas). I've pointed this out to you before Jeff, and for some reason, it just won't register."
Well, that's no mystery. The reason is that your point is nonsense. I've made a close study of early America, and especially Upper Canada (the bit that we now call Michigan is a big part of Upper Canada). Back when the French were the largest European group in the region, there was a lot of intermingling of white and native american society. In the Southeast, many white and black people joined/were adopted by several native american tribes. And then there's ancient Rome, a very cosmopolitan society that assimilated conquered nations and accepted their people as equal citizens. So you're wrong. Not all societies in recorded history self-segregate. Just the racist ones.
"Stop trying to create victimization for blacks where none exists."
Dude, I never started. How about you stop trying to whitewash (heh, see what I did there?) our history into a disneyland version that lets you ignore the bad stuff our nation has done so you can pretend you live in utopia.
"There is no "legacy of slavery" ... to justify black violence against white people today, "
Never once did I assert that violence (against anyone) was "justified." So you can go ahead and retract that implication. I'll wait.
"Please (see Im trying to be nice) stop deliberately stirring the racial cauldron with irresponsible demagoguery."
Class, can anyone give me the definition of the psychological defense mechanism known as 'projection?' Anyone?There is a tendency to be tribal. We still organize ourselves as tribes. Luckily it is usually something innocuous like sports that becomes the basis for our tribalism. i would like to think that we have, for the most part, abandoned race as the basis for those tribal divisions.
It isn't necessarily racism that is the origin of tribalism, but rather, family, extended family and then, ultimately, tribe. It is primitive to say the least but we aren't very far from the cave and the deer skin.
Roman's still maintained out groups into whom no self respecting patrician would marry. Even those rough and ready French trappers and frontiersmen in Detroit weren't the upper class of France. The trapper was liberated from the social conventions that would have marked French royal social expectations.
It is not rare for people to intermarry, but it isn't universal either. We still tend to gravitate toward people most like ourselves. This is a sociological phenomenon not a racially motivated one.Romans had slaves, too, as well as "out groups" whom "patricians wouldn't think of marrying. So what? That doesn't make it right. I prefer "all men are created equal."
The quotation "All men are created equal" has been called an "immortal declaration", and "perhaps" the single phrase of the United States Revolutionary period with the most grand "continuing importance".[1][2] Thomas Jefferson first used the phrase in the Declaration of Independence as a rebuttal to the going political theory of the day: the Divine Right of Kings. It was thereafter quoted or incorporated into speeches by a wide array of substantial figures in American political and social life in the United States. The final form of the phrase was stylized by Benjamin Franklin.[3]
Where I come from we don't look up to people or down on people. We look 'em straight in the eye. We don't put much stock in patricians [or white or black racists.]Really?!?! Where you come from conservatives and whale dung are on the same strata. It is a universal truth that we are tribal in our behavior. We often behave in ways we regret or would not if we gave more thought to that behavior.
You look everyone in the eye as an equal. However, rather than expect he behave as such, you would compel out of the hands of another "equal" the creation of his sweat or genius and award it to that first "equal" - the one who did nothing for it. You would claim some terrible injustice that can only be solved by subjecting the producer to the power of a confiscating state in the name of making everyone materially equal.
I wonder what Jefferson and Franklin would have said about that brand of "equality?"
I suspect they would have had none of it.You are attributing a bunch of assumptions to me. Why don't you let me speak for myself, and explain why you disagree in plain English?
Yeah, I guess it was a lot worse than throwing Christians to the lions considering the 'sophistication' of that era America.
couturepopcafe, Negro violence is not the solution but the result of slavery (past) and racism (present) in America. I wrote a hub, "An underclass look at American Slavery", please read and comment. I don't seek to justify black violence against anybody including themselves, What I offer is reason why violence is spilling over in the Negro cummunity. They reason for the broil over started with slavery and none of us were around at that time. So, why the violence now? RACISM replaced slavery and unemployment replaced full employment. Since 1865 millions of x-slaves and their decendents have struggled against racism in America and have had few victories against the evil invisible one called racism. Jobs for African American youths will solve the problems of drugs and violence in black America, but that's the problem of All Americans today. Negros never handed down hate to there children, just survival skills. You misunderstand me my fellow American
Ok, I'll take you at your word. I didn't think you were insane, just the comment.
I really do get/know how it all started. The racists in this country are not as prolific as the media? and those who want revenge would want us to believe. I say that with one caveat. Although the number of racists may have diminished in recent years thanks in large part, I believe, to black celebritys (people many of any race want to emulate), the fallout from history still covers many. At 60 yrs. of age, I just recently graduated from 4 1/2 years of college. What I saw among the black students was quite an eyeopener. Many couldn't read and many were quite brilliant. It was about an even split in a school where students were about 75% black. (Nashville). So it somewhat showed that those who had the opportunity given by their parents made good but many still had not had the benefit of early childhood skill development. I blame the educational system for this. How does a kid get through grammer school not being able to read? I don't blame the parents because they likely can't read either. Anyway, I hope this comment is not seen as being black and white (no pun intended) as I realize there is always a lot of extenuating circumstance and grey area.
Now, I know that this forum WILL solve racism - if only we yell loud enough - but I must insist that Obama has recently declared that he will be signing the NDAA.
Related Discussions
- 22
Black male 'racist' Sucker Punch
by S Leretseh 11 years ago
If these victims were black and ...well never mind. I'm so sick and tired of saying it ...and seeing it. All the links are 'unprovoked' attacksElderly white male socked in the facehttp://www.surenews.com/crime/assault/b … driver.htmBaltimore:: White male knocked to the ground and...
- 170
What Discrimination Have You Faced as a White Person?
by Sychophantastic 7 years ago
According to recent polls, about half of all white Trump voters feel as though white people face a lot of discrimination.If you're white, please feel free to offer up your tales of discrimination or what you see as white discrimination in society.This is clearly an important topic that doesn't get...
- 229
Obama wins second debate, hands down!
by Holle Abee 11 years ago
Just thought I'd get a jump on the MSM. Many right-leaning reporters are already saying if Obama shows up tonight, the left will declare him as the ultimate, supreme, audacious, awesome, comeback winner. lol
- 114
To all conservatives and moderates, what were on people's minds when
by Grace Marguerite Williams 9 years ago
they saw President Barack Obama as the president of promise and reformation? During President Obama's administration, unemployment and national debt is the HIGHEST it has been. More and more civil liberties are being eroded. Despite Obama's dismal and horrific record, Americans...
- 13
Oh no! Not the white male voter, too!!
by Susan Reid 11 years ago
Saw this on FB today and it's so good I had to share here.BTW, today's new explanation from candidate Romney is that special interest groups (Blacks, Latinos, young people) only voted for Obama because he gave them so many "gifts."The 47% are alive and still...
- 19
Why do white people do not understand racism?
by danicole 9 years ago
Why do white people do not understand racism?