The United States government, and the media, are filled with professional liars. This is not surprising, especially in government. Many elected officials, like Hillary Clinton, are former lawyers, and American lawyers are "the" best liars and con-artists in the world. Understanding this to be true, I am inclined to believe that the killing of 5 Cops in Dallas is nothing but another false flag. The only thing I am uncertain about is whether they are really dead or not. Terrorist attacks carried out by U.S. government operatives, such as The Sand Creek Massacre, The Wounded Knee Massacre, The Bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, The Waco Massacre,The Oklahoma City Bombing, and 9/11, have all proven that the U.S. government will not hesitate to kill innocent civilians in order to either make a point, or to further it's greedy imperialist ambitions. It follows that if the government can so conveniently slaughter women and children, that killing 5 cops wouldn't even raise a sweat. But on the other hand, we have all seen what Hollywood, and technology can do. A few government spooks in conjunction with a few Hollywood professionals, and a government controlled media, could easily create the illusion of 5 dead Cops in Dallas.
And so, "Dead or Alive?" That may forever remain a mystery. But it is no mystery that Black Lives Matter is seeking to empower black people. And racists have never fancied the idea of black people having true economic and political power. In fact, the very notion scares the hell out of them! The purpose of the real, or imagined, killing of 5 Cops in Dallas is a blatant attempt to cripple the Black Lives Matter movement by turning public opinion against the movement.
Hello Government Spooks! I Can See You!
This is the same thing that happened on 9/11. The government wrote a wonderful script, put together a team of mercenaries, then sacrificed and killed thousands of innocent Americans so that the American people would sanction a bloody war in Iraq. It worked then, and their hoping it will work now. Yes, destroying the momentum of Black Lives Matter is the most obvious goal, but the end game appears to be Marshal Law. And I feel that's what this episode of the Dog and Pony show is really all about. And of course, the government has a sense of humor. It is quite ironic that only days after the American people celebrated their imagined freedoms on the 4th of July that the government would stage this event; an event that will make every American citizen a bonafide prisoner of the Police State.
Black Lives Matter has absolutely nothing to gain by the killing of Cops, in Dallas or anywhere else. What white racist Americans need to do is to back up off the black people, forget about their racist ideology for just a little while, and focus on the common enemy that threatens us all. Once the common threat is eliminated, they can then go back to burning crosses and watching Duck Dynasty.
The most racist people I have ever met are not white.
Of course you would begin with a fiction delivered in a soundbyte. In the context of what has been happening here for over 500 years, your cavalier attitude can only lead us to one conclusion about your overall character. I will let you fill in the blanks.
My life experience is fact, not fiction. I didn't state which race has shown the most racism in my experience. (The planet has more than two, you know.) Therefore, you can't deduce the race from my comment and link it to the last 500 years of America.
I also didn't say an entire race is racist. I simply said the most racist people I have met are not white.
And you certainly can't call me a racist for sharing my personal, experienced-based observations about the racism of other people and races.
If I were a true racist, I would name the race and say that entire race is racist, which it is not.
In fact, the race I have in mind has both the most racist people I have ever met and the nicest people I have ever met. It just happens to have more extremes than I have seen in other races.
Then why won't you expose this "mystery race"? I'd love to know who is more racist than Archie Bunker.
This is a very true and comprehensive response to the truest and often hidden racists of today , we do know who they are and yet I will go so far as to say that most racism comes from much of the extreme left . How you ask ? By accusatory statements calling something that ISNT racism at all , racist !
That is the greatest problem today ! The slickened use of an old outdated word or wording. And , if many here today will falsely scream out " racism " where there is NONE ; then they are the truest and most genuine racists on earth!
Then I am curious, how you would explain the disproportionate amount of Indigenous and African citizens who are killed by Cops in a country where whites are the majority. Science teaches us there is a reason for everything; a cause and an effect. And we can see that this is true in our daily lives. So we can see the effect, which is more minority people being killed by Cops. If not racism, what is the cause?
Why don't you tell us how to find an answer to that question??? And this one: If not some other cause, why racism?
Ask yourself why there is a disproportionate amount of men being killed by cops in a country where women are the majority. Would your answer be "sexism"? Or would it be an accurate recognition that most criminals are men?
If you aren't aware you should recognize that there is a disproportionate amount of black criminality in your country: https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/c … /table-43. Blacks are disproportionally arrested for every category of crime, other than alcohol related crimes. Naturally, greater criminality will amount to greater hostile police interaction which will amount to greater shootings.
If we look at the victims of police killings (http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-i … -database#) 24% of them were black so far in 2016, and 26% in 2015. That adequately lines up with the 28% of black criminal arrests in the United States. If we look exclusively at violent crimes - in other words, situations in which police are more likely to use lethal force - it looks even worse: blacks accounted for 52.1% of murders and nonnegligent manslaughter, 52.6% of robberies and 33% of aggravated assaults. If anything, given the rate of violent black crime we should be seeing more than ~25% of police victims being black.
These numbers are even more disturbing in cities like New York: http://www.nyc.gov/html/nypd/downloads/ … d_2014.pdf
75% of shootings committed by blacks, in a city where blacks make up 25% of the population.
As for the Indigenous, I'm not sure where you're seeing that they're killed disproportionately. 1% and 2% of police victims in 2015 and 2016 were Native Americans. They're about 2% of the American population. Sounds about right, all things being equal.
OK George, I get it. Black people are bad people who deserve to be killed, even 12 year old kids. Got it! Now tell us about rabbits one more time.
Are you saying men are bad people who deserve to be killed, even 12 year old boys?
What a typical reaction - I give you the answer that explains the causality, but it's not the one you like so you attack my character, without evidence.
But then again you weren't interested in discovering something about reality, were you? You're just interested in living in your own little bubble where cops are evil and racist.
You'd have to conclude they're sexist too, but that doesn't fit your narrative, does it?
What you provided is a standard racist, apologist,rant using "facts and figures" to make the perpetrators look like victims and the victims look like the perpetrators. I have seen and studied too many of these killings to conclude that a majority are justified. How do you justify the murder of Tamir Rice. What kind of a man can justify the murder of Walter Scott. Even the authorities fired the freak that killed him and charged him with murder. Are you suggesting that they should have let the miscreant go?
How many times have you heard of a Fireman who refused to rescue a child from a burning building because he feared for his life? I have not heard of one. Fireman risk their lives everyday. But I have lost count of all of the cowards who claimed they had to kill because " I feared for my life." What is remarkable is that you publicly defend murderers, and a system that sanctions the murder of unarmed American citizens of all races; men, women, and children. Perhaps one day you will be on the receiving end. On that day, I would like to hear your report.
Did you forget that your definition of racism necessitates a belief of racial superiority? Where did I state superiority anywhere in my explanation? Do you even know my race to make such a judgement?
Obviously I'm not talking about individuals like Walter Scott. These are exceptions, outliers. We are talking about trends. The trend is that minorities in general, but specifically blacks, commit violent crimes at disproportionate rates, and thus will get killed by police at disproportionate rates. This does not mean that all black victims are killed lawfully nor is this a justification for unlawful killings. All I provided is a correlation, same as you, except I accounted for the rate of crime by race, making my correlation stronger.
If you have data to the contrary - that is to say, out of those 306 black victims by police in 2015, that 153+ of them were killed unlawfully - then I'd love to see it. But I don't think you do, given your eagerness to push the "racist" button instead of continuing the discussion.
How can you equate refusing to save someone because it's too dangerous to killing someone because it's too dangerous? What a false equivalency. I imagine there are situations where firefighters are not given the go ahead to enter a building because it is too dangerous for them to enter. They will not be condemned in the news because obviously there is a distinction between refusing to rescue someone due to danger, and killing someone due to danger.
Firefighters have an annual death rate of between ~70 and ~100 deaths per year (http://www.nfpa.org/news-and-research/f … ter-deaths). Police officers have an annual death rate of over 100 (https://www.odmp.org/search/year?year=2002 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_A … ew_by_year). Both risk their lives everyday.
What is remarkable is that you think that you think it fine to paint 1,220,545 police officers as murderers based on, at best, a couple of hundred unlawful killings in a year. That's about one hundredth of a percent of unlawful killings per police officer. What raging killers. The rest are out making the world a better place, ready to risk their lives for you at the touch of three buttons.
Perhaps one day you will be needing their services.
You treat life as if it is only numbers. You show the numbers as if they will explain it all. This is why I suspect you are of European descent or at least someone whose mind has been colonized. Your thinking is more like that of a machine, or reptilian, as opposed to a mammal that exhibits emotion. Apparently it is lost on you that even one senseless murder is one to many. I am a believer in one. You do not know this concept because there are many like you who think and measure human life in percentages. And you did not figure in your calculations the fact that the FBI issued a warning in 2006 that the Ku Klux Klan had infiltrated Police Departments throughout the United States. This information is freely available. Recently the group "Anonymous: announced it was releasing the names of Klan members who had infiltrated the Police across the nation. Here we have two different groups, Anonymous and the FBI, saying the same thing ten years apart.
It is not a great leap to suppose that an organization famous for the lynching and terrorizing of the African and other minorities, would infiltrate Law Enforcement for any other reason than to continue their violence against us. And so, when you look at your numbers, you do not see the corruption that plants evidence, or that provokes violence in order to kill or to make an arrest. You do not see the machinations of evil racists who flood black neighborhoods with powerful and addictive drugs in order to cripple and destroy the African community, as well as the Indigenous communities. My response to you is warranted because what you have presented is superficial in light of the real threat to our communities. You cannot fix a community from within when organizations like the KKK are attacking , and corrupting it from within and from without at every turn. With the so-called browning of America, they see what they are doing as necessary for their survival as a white race, and as a means to maintain a system of white supremacy throughout the United States.
You started this discussion by talking about math, genius. You said cops disproportionately kill blacks and Indigenous Americans, remember? The only way we can measure proportionality is to compare numbers. Comparing numbers doesn't mean I don't care about a single loss of life. How can you possibly conclude th-
...wait, I'm sorry, I was under the impression that you had a salvageable mind. I've just read the rest of your post and now I'm sure that you really were tragically hit on your head as a child. My condolences. Carry on with your conspiracy theories.
At the very least you can take comfort in knowing that your thinking is not of European descent, or of a machine, or reptilian. Rest assured, there's no thinking in your posts at all.
More Americans View Blacks As Racist Than Whites, Hispanics
July 03, 2013
http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_ … _hispanics
The figures might be slightly different if the poll was run in July 2016, or a lot different.
I think that is very true , I truly don't have a racist bone in my body , But I do have many angry ones !
So here is the point I try always to make even though I do not articulate it well enough ,- If I am called racist because I am part of the white race --and aren't a racist ; Who then IS the real racist . And I don't truly believe that this is coming only from black America as much as I DO believe it's an invention of the intellectual and divisive leftist media and collegiate think tanks !
Thanks for the link. I looked at the polls but such polls aren't reliable. If you ask a racist white person what they think about racism in the black community, of course a majority are going to go with the negative report. And if you ask a room full of NAZI's what they think about the Jews, they're also going to deliver a negative report. And so such polls give us very little insight into how the black community feels towards whites in general. But from my own experience I have discovered that very few African or Indigenous people are racist.
When people say a certain minority person is racist against whites, what they are commonly doing is using racism as a synonym for "dislike", or "hatred". And that is a perversion of the term.
A. The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
B. prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
We can see from the definition above that the operative words are "superior and "inferior".
We do not see "dislike" or "hatred" in this definition. Of course we can take license with any term and pervert the meaning, and this explains a big part of the problem we are having with race relations here in the United States. The language is being perverted and misused in order to support a racist agenda, which makes it difficult for us to communicate feelings and ideas.
I can tell you from experience that the general feeling in the African community as well as in the Indigenous community is frustration, anger, and a growing hate for a system and a people who refuse to give any quarter, or any relief; a people who expect us to continue living in denial, when the Police are using our people for target practice. And when we stand against this evil, they say that we are also racists. But I have just proven that many Americans do not understand their own language. Am I angry ? Absolutely! Do I hate the racist American, the Police State, and this evil system? Absolutely! Am I a racist? Absolutely not!
Hate is not a four letter word! Once again, the world has been deceived. Any man would be a fool not to hate what seeks to dispossess him, to discriminate against him, and to destroy him and his people. Many Americans express hatred toward the Muslim Terrorists. Many of my people are expressing hatred toward the Christian Terrorists. And so it appears we have a lot in common. Perhaps we should start from there.
~ today there are whites who feel superior to any other culture or race??? TODAY???? Only ignorant hicks who live in the hills maybe … surely a small minority.
Those definitions are not the only definitions of racism:
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.
The definition you added I have already covered. In my experience with white racists, which is quite extensive, I have found that a feeling of superiority and entitlement almost always precedes an emotional reaction such as anger or hate. Unless someone is totally mentally deranged, people always have a reason for hating someone else. The average racist doesn't normally start hating on black people until they feel like they are being threatened economically, romantically, in a violent confrontation, or in some other manner. Otherwise, hate is not a necessary component of racism. But a feeling of superiority is an essential component that must always be there in order to qualify as racism.
You covered it by considering it a perversion of the term and used the dictionary definitions as your proof, but the dictionary has a definition of hatred as well.
I have no way of knowing if you are still living at home and reading the interesting stories provided in Hustler Magazine, or if you are a big time Wall Street Investor. Either way, I cannot account for your inability to understand and comprehend definitions in a dictionary. It's actually pretty straightforward. For example:
1: a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race
2: racial prejudice or discrimination
racist play \-sist also -shist\ noun or adjectiv
This definition is setup sequentially, with the primary definition followed by supporting elements.
You'll note that just like the supporting element you identified, (hatred) these supporting elements do not stand well on their own when isolated from the primary.
If someone who knew nothing whatsoever about racism should ask : "What is racism?" and I replied: " It is racial prejudice", they would still not understand. They would then have to ask," What is racial prejudice?" Even if they understood each individual word of the phrase, it would still beg the question: "Why?" But once the primary definition is given, the "Why" is clearly revealed.
To suggest that the phrase "racial hatred" or the phrase "a hatred of other races" can properly define racism may not absurd, but left standing on it's own, it is simply not enough, and most certainly incomplete. Thus, to define racism in such an incomplete fashion by using a supporting element as the primary is nothing less than a perversion of the term, as it creates a false interpretation.
We could not say that a white man is a racist simply because he expresses a hatred for all black people. This is incomplete, and tells us nothing. We must first find out the "Why". Why does this man hate black people. When he explains that he was beaten and robbed by three black men ten years ago, then we can understand that this man is not racist, as he suffered a transgression, and it was his bitterness which caused him to hate. not a feeling of superiority.
Of course, it would play the same way if it were the black man who hated all whites because of a similar transgression. We could not properly define him as a racist. The "why" being the most important factor in this determination.
To further illustrate:
Here is a definition I found that is not necessarily sequential, Each part can stand on it's own. This is because each contains"superiority" which is the operative term in this definition.
1.the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races.
2.prejudice, discrimination, or antagonism directed against someone of a different race based on the belief that one's own race is superior.
"a program to combat racism"
I have no way of knowing if you hit yourself hard on the head when you were a child or if you're just naturally this dull. Either way, your attempt at educating me on how to use a dictionary is laughable.
To start off, dictionaries contain succinct and limited summaries of a word's meaning. They are not all-encompassing entities. If someone were to ask you a question about something as complex as racism and you respond with a singular dictionary definition, when it has several different meanings which are not fully explored by a dictionary, you shouldn't be surprised if they aren't able to fully understand the concept.
Webster's definitions of racism are two different definitions, not one definition comprised of a "primary" and a "supporting" element. You're just pulling that out of your rear. No such thing exists, neither do "sequential" dictionary definitions. They're either ordered by historical usage or by common usage. We know they're distinct definitions because they can be used independently of one another. One can be racially prejudiced or discriminatory without believing in racial superiority (for instance, finding certain races more attractive than others), and one can believe in racial superiority without being racially discriminatory (do I have to explain how someone can believe in something without acting on that belief?).
Your "why" justification is just cringe-worthy. I am left imagining a 5 year old constantly asking why in response to your answer. "Why are they racially prejudiced?" "Because they believe in racial superiority." "Why do they believe they're racially superior?" "Because someone wronged them in the past." "Why did someone wrong them in the past?" "Because they needed money." "Why did they need money?" Ad infinitum. There should be no 'begging the question' because the definition is quite straightforward. Does it fully explain racism in all its depth? No. But it is straightforward enough to understand, which is why it is used analogously for sexism:
1: prejudice or discrimination based on sex; especially: discrimination against women
: prejudice or discrimination against a particular age-group and especially the elderly
: unfair treatment of people because of their social or economic class
All three of which do not have a "why" as a "primary" definition. Perhaps you could tell Websters that their definitions are incomplete and are perversions of the terms. Or perhaps you could learn that "discrimination" and "belief of supremacy" can be independent of one another, which is why they are different definitions, not a primary + a supporting element.
Your error is in assuming that the act of racism must involve some sort of aspect of superiority and can have no other definition without that 'operative term'. That is a fallacy: https://www.logicallyfallacious.com/too … Definition
I'll tell you what, though: if you can find any reputable source that considers a hatred for all races to not be racist, I'll give you a second thought. Heck, find anyone that thinks a white man hating all blacks because of the actions of three black men is not racist. Good luck.
mrpo said: "To start off, dictionaries contain succinct and limited summaries of a word's meaning. They are not all-encompassing entities. If someone were to ask you a question about something as complex as racism and you respond with a singular dictionary definition, when it has several different meanings which are not fully explored by a dictionary, you shouldn't be surprised if they aren't able to fully understand the concept".
Don't know why you included this. Obviously, dictionaries contain limited summaries. The fact that I have at length explained the term "racism" clearly indicates that I did not rely solely on a singular definition to make my point. On the contrary, I have provided you
with a cornucopia of tart and fresh ideas.
mrpo said: One can be racially prejudiced or discriminatory without believing in racial superiority (for instance, finding certain races more attractive than others) ..."
Thank You! Here you just further illustrated the importance of the "Why". As we can see in this part of your analysis, you have confirmed what I have already stated. Terms like "racially prejudiced" and "discriminatory" are supporting elements that cannot stand alone in defining racism. Only when we add the primary of "superiority" do we achieve closure and understanding.
mrpo said: "...and one can believe in racial superiority without being racially discriminatory (do I have to explain how someone can believe in something without acting on that belief? ....'
This part of your explanation is totally out in left field. (Is this the best you can do?) There was never any question of whether or not overt acts of discrimination were required to qualify a believer in racial superiority to be a racist. This is nothing but a strawman.
As far as the 3 words you listed, you are completely wrong: 100%. They all have a "Why" in the definition. Without it they don't make any sense. No one discriminates based on age unless there is a reason. No one discriminates based on class or sex without a reason. To be sexist a man must have an issue with women in general, and not just one individual. This leads us to the "Why". What is so hard about that? At this point, does Webster have to take you by the hand and spell it all out?
But you are now trying to have it both ways. And I am sure you are surprised that I have caught you. At the beginning of your tantrum you said:
"To start off, dictionaries contain succinct and limited summaries of a word's meaning. They are not all-encompassing entities.".
I agree, but now you say ".. Perhaps you could tell Websters that their definitions are incomplete and are perversions of the terms."
Of course they are incomplete, as you agreed at the very beginning, but here at the end of your rant you infer completeness. I'm flattered that you were so interested in tearing me down, but it appears you have failed, not miserably, but a failure nevertheless. However, I'm sure it's not the first time. Once you have recovered from your loss, come back again, and I will deliver more of the sweet justice that you deserve.
Don't know why you included this.
Short term memory must be a side effect from hitting your head as a child. It's alright. I'll explain.
The fact that I have at length explained the term "racism" clearly indicates that I did not rely solely on a singular definition to make my point.
Allow me to remind you: you talked about an example where you try to explain to a person racism using one definition from the dictionary, and were baffled that they didn't fully understand the concept. Again, it's because you were using one definition from a dictionary. Your complaint was that definition 2 did not fully explain racism because it lacks the "why" when dictionary definitions are not required to be in-depth explanations of complex concepts with various interpretations. Definition 1 is also not fully explanatory of racism because it lacks the "how" and the mechanisms of racism in practice (racism is not only a belief). This is why you shouldn't be using dictionary definitions as sources of explanation. This is why your example of a person not understanding racism completely from definition 2 is moot. In that example they would also not understand racism from definition 1.
Thank You! Here you just further illustrated the importance of the "Why". As we can see in this part of your analysis, you have confirmed what I have already stated. Terms like "racially prejudiced" and "discriminatory" are supporting elements that cannot stand alone in defining racism. Only when we add the primary of "superiority" do we achieve closure and understanding.
Except I made no illustration of the "why" a person is racist. In my example, a person could find another race not attractive because of subjective tastes, but they could also find them not attractive because of stereotypical behaviour. The former is not commonly seen as racist, but the latter is. In neither case is there any sense of superiority.
It's a weak example on my part though. Here are others:
hiring practices based on race
housing practices based on race
education services based on race
provision of goods and services based on race
None of the above necessitate a belief of superiority.
There was never any question of whether or not overt acts of discrimination were required to qualify a believer in racial superiority to be a racist. This is nothing but a strawman.
The point was to demonstrate how those two definitions are independent of one another. You don't need to believe in superiority to discriminate based on race, and you don't need to be racially discriminatory to believe in superiority. To remind you, you were making the argument that there was one primary definition + supporting elements. This is not true because the definitions can be independent of one another, and because dictionaries do not operate on a primary + supporting element basis.
As far as the 3 words you listed, you are completely wrong: 100%. They all have a "Why" in the definition. Without it they don't make any sense. No one discriminates based on age unless there is a reason. No one discriminates based on class or sex without a reason. To be sexist a man must have an issue with women in general, and not just one individual. This leads us to the "Why". What is so hard about that? At this point, does Webster have to take you by the hand and spell it all out?
Are you listening to yourself? You're the one demanding Webster spell out the "why" of racial discrimination in definition 2, and demanding that all the "whys" of racial discrimination must be "belief in superiority". In all analogous definitions there is no spelling out of the "why", let alone that the why is superiority.
Look at definition 2 again: racial prejudice or discrimination.
Now let's transpose this definition to your little diatribe:
As far as the word you listed, you are completely wrong: 100%. It has a "Why" in the definition. Without it it doesn't make any sense. No one discriminates based on race unless there is a reason. To be racist a person must have an issue with a race in general, and not just one individual. This leads us to the "Why". What is so hard about that? At this point, does Webster have to take you by the hand and spell it all out?
For some reason you're okay with the dictionary not spelling out the "why" for ageism, sexism and classism, but it must spell it out in the case of racism or else it is a perversion of the term. Again I wonder, how hard you hit your head as a child, to be so contradictory in such a short span of time.
But you are now trying to have it both ways.
makes it all the more hilarious when you project this contradiction onto me.
Why don't we look at how many times you've flip-flopped in our brief discussion:
- Insists racism must be based on racial superiority. Accuses me of racism when I made no declaration of racial superiority.
- Insists that the dictionary definition of racism must have a "why" or else it is a perversions of terms. Is aware that dictionaries are not all-encompassing entities.
- Insists that the dictionary definition of racism must spell out the "why" specifically to be about superiority. Is aware that dictionaries do not have to spell out the "why" for ageism, sexism and classism and such "whys" are not about superiority.
and as a bonus:
- Insists racism must be based on racial superiority. Thinks Europeans and their descendants are reptilian and machine like, without emotion.
That one isn't a flip-flop though. Just an incredible lack of self-awareness.
And I am sure you are surprised that I have caught you.
*grabs popcorn* this should be good.
Of course they are incomplete, as you agreed at the very beginning, but here at the end of your rant you infer completeness.
Did you hear that whooshing sound? That was the point sailing over your head. It's reductio ad absurdum. My first recommendation is dripping with sarcasm, my second is the actual recommendation.
Notice that my secondary recommendation was for you to learn how dictionaries actually operate: Or perhaps you could learn that "discrimination" and "belief of supremacy" can be independent of one another, which is why they are different definitions, not a primary + a supporting element. It's to illustrate how you're so simple-minded to think that dictionaries must express the "why" within their definitions specifically, like "superiority", or else they are perversions of the terms.
I understand this can be difficult to wrap your head around, so here are a few examples:
Perhaps the Earth really is flat and you should warn people to be careful of falling off its edges. Or perhaps you should learn about spheres and gravity.
Perhaps the Earth really is 6000 years old and humans walked among dinosaurs and had them as pets. Or perhaps you should learn about radiometric dating methods.
Perhaps the Sun really rises up every morning riding on a golden chariot. Or perhaps you should learn about orbital paths and the Earth's rotation.
To repeat the words of a wise man:
I'm flattered that you were so interested in tearing me down, but it appears you have failed, miserably. However, I'm sure it's not the first time. Once you have recovered from your loss, come back again, and I will deliver more of the sweet justice that you deserve.
Incidentally, have you found a single reputable source that considers a hatred of an entire race to not be racist?
Seriously, there must be someone in your life that can help you through this. I have neither the time, nor the inclination to wallow around this infinite regress on a Saturday afternoon. I will state my case one last time and my position is irrefutable.
Websters notwithstanding: Anger, hate, discrimination, racial prejudice or preference, and any other term synonymous with these that I have not mentioned, cannot, on their own define racism. These terms are only supporting elements that help to define the primary. The operative word in racism is "superiority". The operative idea is that there is a superior race as opposed to an inferior race or races.
The problem here is that you are what many refer to as a psuedo-intellectual. I suspect that at best you may have an AA degree from a community college. But here is the real shocker: There are many walking around with Masters Degrees from prestigious universities who I have little respect for. It is no great feat to memorize facts and figures. The Eurocentric approach to science, metaphysics, philosophy, and religion has delivered the world to the brink of destruction. Knowledge and wisdom do not rise up out of books like the weeds that rise up from the Earth! A book is nothing more than a snapshot; an image; a document of the past.
Whatever we may learn from a book or a document is only second hand knowledge at best. And we can hardly define a man who has simply memorized the entire contents of a book as someone who is wise. Once again, such men are more likened to a machine, or a reptile. Emotion is the key ingredient to wisdom and knowledge. And you can scour the internet and you will not find this phrase anywhere, as I am the author, and I am the authority who has proclaimed it.
But make no mistake, I am not attempting to win an argument, because the truth is irrefutable. This rebuttal is simply a public mockery of a system that for over 500 years has fancied itself to be on the cutting edge of everything, when in reality it is only a system fashioned by brutes and barbarians who do not understand the purpose, or the design of human emotion. It is a mockery of fools; fools who from the very beginning have been looking for gold and great riches beneath the surface of the Earth, when the greatest riches known to man can only be found in human emotion.
I know who you are, and I know what you are, and you cannot hide as we are here in the Earth. I cannot account for a man who always looks to other men for understanding, when we are all swimming in the sea. Such men demonstrate a low self-esteem. Arrogance is their constant companion, and assures them that what they do not know, or what they have not been told by an established figure of authority, simply does not matter.
Now you can proceed with your vitriol, or reprise your favorite remark about "hitting my head". I have had many little dogs as pets, and I loved them all very much, but they did not understand either. In fact, they just looked at me and smiled, so rest assured, I am not offended.
I'm impressed. Another response where you manage to not address a single one of my points.
Yes, I am aware that you think racism must operate on superiority. Repeating it ad nauseam won't make your case any stronger. Why don't you try addressing the several examples I gave where superiority is not involved and yet the actions are largely considered racist?
Fortunately, I am a considerate person. Since you apparently do not have the time or inclination to wallow in this discussion, despite regurgitating your "irrefutable" case at length, I'll save you some time.
Show me a single source that considers a hatred for all of a given race, based on the actions of a few, to not be racist.
(This is just a curiosity of mine, but to revisit your example of a white man hating black people because of three black men robbing him 10 years ago: would you consider the white man racist if he then directed his anger towards attacking other blacks, and only other blacks? Would you consider him racist if his bitterness and hatred led him to supremacist beliefs? Would you still excuse him for suffering a transgression in the past?)
No, that is not what the word means. There are other words for that. Learn the English language if you want to speak it. It doesn't matter if you hate the whole world! If the operative term or concept of "superiority" is not there, then it is "not" racism.
You want your definition to fly because you want to be able to say that black people are also racist against whites, or that Black Lives Matter is a racist organization. I guess this is supposed to mitigate the racism of white Americans. But the fact is that in my experience, most black people are "not" racist against whites and are simply reacting to racist aggression. This reaction can often produce hate and anger, but it is absurd to suggest that someone who is being oppressed and victimized is going to feel "superior".Usually such racial tension has the opposite effect. That doesn't even make sense. Your argument is dead. I just had you for lunch. Read and learn.
I'm not asking about what the word means to you. You've made it perfectly clear that you think it only exists on one definition. I'm asking for a source that shares your singular interpretation of that word.
Is this task really so difficult? Find someone, anyone, that agrees with you that hating people based on race is not racist.
What if that hate leads to belief in superiority? Would it become racist then?
What if that hate leads to violent retaliation against certain races? Is that still not racist to you?
(By the way, it would matter if you hated the whole world - that would not make you racist, that would make you a misanthrope. Just a little English lesson for you.)
Ah, you're one of those that likes to edit in content after posting.
You want your definition to fly because you want to be able to say that black people are also racist against whites, or that Black Lives Matter is a racist organization. I guess this is supposed to mitigate the racism of white Americans.
Sorry, where are you getting this from? Where did I mention black on white racism, or BLM? All I'm asking from you is to corroborate your definition with another source. It really has nothing to do with the race situation in the United States, it has to do with proper word usage.
But the fact is that in my experience, most black people are "not" racist against whites and are simply reacting to racist aggression.
That was Dylann Roof's justification for the murders of 9 black people. Do you consider him to be simply reacting to racist aggression?
This reaction can often produce hate and anger, but it is absurd to suggest that someone who is being oppressed and victimized is going to feel "superior". That doesn't even make sense.
This is why it's folly to operate the definition of racism solely on the word superior.
Your argument is dead. I just had you for lunch.
if you say so, it must be true!
Read and learn.
Did you really just edit your comment for that incredible one-liner?
wow mrpoop you got a lot of time on your hands
You hit that nail right directly on the head ! Wrenchbisket' , in his egocentric ,extroverted ,anarchist doubletalk would sooner see anarchy in our society . His responses to all forum posts are in effect the same as Ward Churchill , A pretend native American victim who went around the country accusing all Americans of being little Eichmann's' ,for the purpose of self promotion after 9/11 , and when found out that he isn't even native American , lost his esteemed professorship and has since all but disappeared from the American public.
I will speak for the VSMM , anyone remember the Vast Silent Moral Majority of America in the eighties ?
My message to the men [women ] in blue in America , IF there is a war on the police authorities in America , you have our support to send the perpetrators home in body .bags !
yeah, and I remember Archie Bunker, too.
You conveniently ignore the police shootings in Louisiana and Minnesota. I say, long live BLM- No justice , no peace.
I do not excuse the killings of police in Dallas. But, they will not be used as political misdirection from the loathesome Right to divert attention from police brutality in Black communities and against Black people without just cause, period.
If we don't have that understanding and if you insist, we will let loose the dogs of war. YOUR idea of peace will not happen with the price being my subjugation. Always better to die on your feet than to live on your knees.
I agree. I have lived a good life. I'm not going to ruin it by dying a coward. If the "men in blue" have to rely on onhorseback and the Archie Bunker Brigade they are in deep manure. These "white nationalists" love beating their chests and talking about how brave, and how patriotic they are, but the truth tells a different story. Where were all these defenders of freedom and the American way in 2014 when Samantha Ramsey, a young white woman, was murdered in Kentucky by a miscreant cop. The details of her case reveal that this was cold blooded murder, yet the low life who killed her was cleared of all charges. But her story is just one drop of innocent blood in a very large bucket. Although it is true that the Indigenous and the African are disproportionately murdered by cops, it is also true that being the majority, more whites are killed by cops than any other group. So why aren't the KKK and all these white nationalists marching in protest? Why are they not demanding justice for their white brothers and sisters? I will tell you why. It is because they do not really care about justice for the white man. They only care about the white man when it involves an issue about race, especially when that race is Native or African.
The cop who murdered Samantha Ramsey claimed she was drunk, and ran over his foot! And so we understand the following: a citizen can be executed by a miscreant Cop for running over his foot in Kentucky, a citizen can be shot in the back and executed by a miscreant Cop for running the other way in North Carolina, a child can be killed by a miscreant Cop for playing with a toy gun in Cleveland Ohio, a woman can be lynched in the Walker County Jail for disrespecting a sadistic low life wearing a badge! Enough is enough! No, when I think of all of the white people, all of the black people, and all of my people who have been tortured and murdered by cops, I am all out of sympathy for Cops who get killed in the line of duty. How many Texas cops had sympathy for Sandra Bland? How many Texas cops took to the streets and protested the lynching of Sandra Bland in the Walker County Jail? And as far as the rhetoric about the "good cops", if they are so damn "good" then why has the senseless murder of U.S. citizens by the people hired to protect them continued unabated?
Yes, indeed, I have not had any crosses burning in yard my lately. For me, life has basically been good.
Unfortunately, a byproduct in living in this culture as a black man comes a certain amount of anger and rage at inequity, that is not only ignored, but denied. Because of a fortuitous advantage or two, that anger is channelled along productive paths rather than destructive ones. What awaits the undisciplined expression of that anger is prison, drugs, a marginal existence or death.
But, part of my mission is to remind people that we still have unresolved issues of race and class and that there will be no comfort for anyone unless there is comfort for all. Taking my time to remind people of these things through information and debate is how I channel the energy.
And, yes, the KKK are only involved in issues of intolerance, short of that they are dupes of a corrupt system (plutocracy) willing themselves to be oppressed by it before they ever considering the rise of a wooly head in protest.
The case in Minnesota crosses the line, as even the Governor of that state acknowledged jackboot tactics as to the way this innocent man was treated.
Oh, by the way, the Missus says 'Aloha' to you
Aloha! I wish I was back in Hawaii. Florida is nice, but Hawaii is better. I always felt more comfortable around the people there.
The fact that you can click off the names of these people so readily is proof of how rare they are. We have over 187,000 cops in this country. Millions of interactions, positive and negative with citizens every day. MILLIONS. And we have these incidents held up as emblematic of cops across the country when we see five or six a YEAR. And we only hear about them because of video and a 24 hour news cycle, run by sensationalists, not journalists.
Oh, don't bother showing him measures of proportionality and incidence rates. Even if such analysis adequately explains the extent of the problem, he doesn't like math. He thinks it's a racist invention of machine-like and reptilian Europeans.
Out of curiosity, is that number the number of federal policemen, or an overall number?
Really? I've been seeing much higher numbers than that, admittedly through quick Google searches: http://blog.skepticallibertarian.com/20 … n-the-usa/
I would like to see the analysis that explains why you don't have any original ideas. It appears you base everything that you say on what someone else said. Did you ever try to think for yourself?
Thinking for oneself is good but if you are easily proven wrong, on a consistent basis, it might mean you aren't thinking as much as you think you are.
You can find that analysis in your local library, right next to “Why Pigs Fly” and “Why wrenchBiscuit Is the Sexiest Human^2 of All Time” in the fiction section.
You are like a majority of Americans, and so you are not alone. But I do not accept the label of "American". You think and talk about percentages. The civilized man, or entity, does not think in this manner. If only one child in a population of 300 million is killed by a miscreant cop, then we have all failed that child; we have all failed that family. Life is the most precious commodity in the entire universe. Without life there is nothing but rocks and stones. If you have a child, and you have love in your heart for that child, the death of that child is the death of you. From such an event there is no recovery. But your cavalier attitude is not surprising. This is why Americans can so easily celebrate murder and genocide on Columbus Day, and on the 4th of July. But just as the Jews say, "We Will Never Forget", and in time we will recover our culture, our lands, and our continent.
But that is not all. You defend this evil force by suggesting they are not all murderers. This may be true. But certainly, without a doubt,they are all extortionists who extort money from the citizen in the form of traffic fines and penalties; fines and penalties created for the express purpose of extorting money from the citizen. For example: The current DUI Laws were designed to bleed the citizen dry; even citizens who are not drunk or impaired, but who have only exceeded an arbitrary limit. This is nothing but legalized, organized crime. Anyone can do the research and see that far more people are killed by sober drivers than drunk drivers. Look it up and see for yourself. The notion that there are "good cops" is a myth.If they were "good" they would not stand behind the bad cops. If they were "good" they would not enforce laws designed to extort money from the citizen.
I cannot be defined by evil or misguided men. And so, any vicious attack upon my character is only the sound of dogs barking.
It's this type of violent mentality that is fueling the problems in America today. Thankfully, such people are a small minority in our country.
I'd hate to have to rely on that support. Maybe he's gonna provide some lemonade and other refreshments, while their out there dodging rocks, bottles, and bullets.
It is remarkable that you would focus more on a typo than on the overall message of a thread. Even if you had your own original insight it would be refreshing. Many suffer from low-self-esteem, and because of this they will commonly attack and criticize others over trivial matters. I suppose it must energize them, or give them some kind of a "high".I suggest that you try to actually add something of value, as that provides an even greater sense of satisfaction.
I've notice that too, from those with low self esteem. I'll even add that they often tend to brag about themselves; their "massive" intellect, their race or even their sexual prowess. It's never true but it seems to build themselves up in their own mind.
That's funny wilderness! I love how you are so "absolute". I'll bet you were standing right there when the world was created. Because it would be impossible for you to be so sure of yourself otherwise. I find it remarkable, and quite fascinating that people seem to be more concerned about social etiquette, and my delivery, than the wonderful message that I bring. And I am bringing a message of hope and deliverance to humanity.
I am showing people how to save the human race, while also showing them how to improve their sex life. The fact that you cannot accept that you are watching pure genius unfold before your very eyes, indicates that you do not feel that you are worthy enough to have a ring side seat to such a marvelous spectacle. But please, and I mean this sincerely without the least bit of sarcasm: You should not feel that you are not worthy, as I truly feel that you are just as important as any other man. Having a superior intellect does not mean that I am "better" than anyone. It simply means I am what I am. Let's face it, a car has a motor and 5 wheels. Metaphorically speaking, my intellect is the engine that makes it run, but without people like you, (the wheels) I would be going nowhere at all. And so, there is no need for arrogance, or jealousy, as we must all work together.
Strange, this kind of race-obsessed, Aspergers rant usually comes from Billy Bob, sitting in his mom's basement, next to a rebel flag, in his underwear. It's oddly refreshing to hear it from a BLM fan. Still disturbing, but refreshing.
Credence , Wrench , <personal attacks snipped>, the fact that cowardly statements like yours are even allowed shows me that we need speech control-and not gun controls ! It is mass- idiotic statements like yours that are the reason for acts like these . Neither one of you nor anyone you know is a victim of racism in America today or ever will be ! Nor have you or they been such for decades , and yet you continue to ride out the P.C.. stupidity and glorify the pasts of forgotten hatred and violence .
This is all fueled by nothing OTHER than a glory romance with the sixties revolutionary era in America .
by and for other twisted individuals like the old black panther stupidity , Neither of you are victims - and neither of us are perpetrators , I suggest you grow up , mature up and learn a respect for the vast majority of our awesome law enforcement community .
Fortunately , law enforcement is winning and will continue to do so !
Well, horse, some of us revere the First Amendment and based on that will not be silenced. You want your guns, and I will acquire those when needed AND keep my free speech, thanks...
The stuff you dribble about is really quite ignorant. There is little bit of Panther in every Black man. We are already 'grown up', you don't think that I don't know about your 'system' inside out?
I certainly want justice for the police officers assualted, but I want justice for those civilians assualted by the rogue cops, it is the same for me.
I cheer the Sixties, it is just unfortunate that too many folks like you failed to learn its lessons.
I don't know of anyone of color who have not been subject to racism during their lifetime. So, what planet do you hail from?
You show, time and time again, how naive you are and how little you know. Mayberry is a fictional town, so turn off the TV, go live and see the world for what is is.
There is a million Americans killed or imprisoned each year over Marijanna. Cannabis being the most important plant on earth.
Only two cops where killed this one year of raids I know of. What happen to cops laying down their lives for it's citizen's rather than the other way round.
Castle , you need to go do a doobie , nobody cares about cannabis anymore , most states are legalizing in fact why don't you return from Canada and join one of the medical clinics.
Just where in the world do citizens lay down THEIR lives for cops ?
Marijanna was rasist calling it the Mexican drug in order to deport Mexican. They claim Pot made blacks think they were good as white. Then this drug was used to police the World in 160 countries also to enforce oil dollars.
This 80 year war is slowly losing along with bankers on the attack and run. Confusing people all to hell.
When cops kill more than 8 times greater than all terrorist combined, then citizens are laying down their lives over complete nonsense.
Some things here you have hit on, sadly, may be true...I feel sorry for the young ones in our world who have such a bleak future, if things don't change very soon. There seems to be a concerted effort to create a world of racial hatred and this will only lead to more violence. If we don't believe in a god, it's time to get religion and start praying. whonu
wow you false phlag conspiracy theorists are nutz. o no the walmart is out of fishsticks it must be a false flag operation perpetrated by the men in black working with aliens who are stealing the fish supply to feed the aliens on there hoam planet also i'm totally not a racist even tho i'm obsessed with black people and trannys. wow get a life guys.
Perhaps you've just arrived on HP forums , do yourself a favor and get over your need for hitting your "look at me " button too many times , there is a serious conversation here .
That was brilliant. Have you seen Jonathan lately?
Anyone have a comment on the fact that the Dallas PD. fully and equally represents the ethnic mix of its very citizens ,seems to me BLM kind of doesn't have a leg to stand on there ! The crime rates there have declined to the lowest levels since 1930 , Yet watch as our media promotes and blames "racial inequity " in Dallas.
Maybe it should be politically correct to allow blacks and hispanics to break the laws and be disrespectful to police. Yes, we should give them a pass. Then the world be at peace.
You make the assumption that all of those killed by the cops were either disrespectful or breaking the law. Not True. But most importantly, you seem to forget that the duty of the Police is to keep the peace, and to arrest those who are breaking the law so that they may answer to a judge and/or jury in a court of law. Even if someone has committed multiple acts of murder, the Police do not have the right to be judge,jury, and executioner. Furthermore, white racists are treating this strictly as a racial issue. And so we need to go back to school for just a minute. As I stated earlier, the numbers show that although minorities are disproportionately murdered by cops, overall,more whites are killed by cops than any other group. So Katherine, if you choose not to care about my people I can accept that. But I would think that you might be concerned about your own people, as they are also at risk. We are living in a Police State where they have unlimited powers over the citizen. That's what a Police State is. That means any freak can pass a test and become a Cop. At that point he can pull the citizen over in their car,rape them, sodomize them, and even kill them. And this has been done many times over. Just read the news reports over the last ten years.
And let me tell you something else you probably didn't know. I served 6 years in the USN. I joined at the age of 17. I would guess at least a quarter of the people on the last ship I was on were gay, homosexuals, whatever you want to call it. They were men who liked having sex with men. I know this because several were good friends of mine. Of course I was a quick study even back then. Once I overcame the initial shock and disillusionment of the whole thing, I realized it was actually a blessing, because it meant less competition for women when we were in port.
Yes, I was initially disillusioned, not because I had a problem with homosexuals, but because of being so young and naive. I had subscribed to the lie that men in the military were necessarily "Macho Men" like John Wayne, Rambo. etc., But I found that it just ain't so, and it really does make sense. If you are gay, where do you really want to go? You want go where there are lots of available, and single men. It is no wonder that gays would be attracted to the military. The same holds true of Lesbians. My girlfriend (a Wave) in San Diego had many lesbian friends who would come visit and go to the Padre games with her when I didn't feel like it. So what is the moral to the story?
Gays and Lesbians are attracted to the military like moths to a flame. By the same token, psychopaths and sadists are attracted to Law Enforcement. Why wouldn't they be? I don't need to fill in the blanks. And what you all should be concerned about is the fact that there is no proven method, or psychological testing that can weed out these freaks of nature. Sweet Jesus, it has been known for decades that criminals can fool lie detector tests. How hard do you think it would be for a psychopath or a sadist to put on the proper face when necessary, and give the proper answers on a psych evaluation? Every time you get in your car you are playing Russian Roulette. And the person who pulls you over could be a predator with a badge,a gun, and the authority to use it.
That's why you have guys like Justin Timberlake and then you have guys like Pat Boone. In spite of being white, Justin Timberlake, at some point in his life, learned how to "loosen up". But Pat Boone never did. And so, Pat Boone has always had what many refer to as "White Man's Disease", which is slang for ,"He Ain't Got No Rhythm". Get some rhythm in your life before it's too late.
First of all, are you suggesting that being disrespectful of a Cop warrants a death sentence? Really? And why do you see a need to respect Cops any more than anyone else? How are they deserving of that respect? They are not only killing innocent people, but they extort money from citizens everyday across the country based on laws dreamed up by legislators to do just that: Extort money from citizens!
For example, a friend of mine had the door frame on her front door replaced in order to swing a new door. Code enforcement claimed she had to pay a $500.00 fine for not first paying for a permit! Thankfully, a contractor friend was able to lie about it so she was able to avoid the fine. This woman is retired and on a fixed income. This happens all the time. The whole system is corrupt. No, I have no respect for thieves who have developed a million ways to "legally" steal money from senior citizens, and then use the Cops as muscle to collect their ill-gotten revenue.
"The 'average racist' (?) doesn't normally start hating on black people until they feel like they are
1. being threatened economically
2. being threatened romantically
3. in a violent confrontation
4. some other manner." Such as perceiving one's LIFE is threatened?
"Otherwise, hate is not a necessary component of racism.
"But a feeling of superiority is an essential component that must always be there in order to qualify as racism."
This commentary is on point. Talking about enforcing rules and regulations is not. Police signed up to uphold the law. Maybe they should not sign up.
If they are so afraid of their shadow that they feel compelled to shoot and kill unarmed civilians: civilians with gun permits who are reaching for their ID as requested, or children playing with toy guns, or men running in the opposite direction, then yes, the cowards should not sign up. I am not afraid of 12 year old boys with toy guns. And if I am wearing a bullet proof vest, and I am in a police cruiser, and I have another cop with me , along with a radio, tasers, and several guns, I would simply pull up a safe distance away and say over the loudspeaker: "Please put down your weapon", and the young boy would comply, and no one is killed.
Common sense tells me what to do in order to protect my life and the life of a child. This requires no special training. The Cop who killed Tamir Rice is a cold blooded murderer without a doubt. He could have done exactly what I just described. And no one has ever explained why he didn't. No one has ever explained why within 3 seconds of arriving on the scene this low life felt compelled to shoot a 12 year old boy who was threatening no one. Yet the racist grand jury in Cleveland did not charge the miscreant with murder. You should not wonder why people are angry.
Of course there are good and bad cops, but for every couple of bad apples… there are lots just trying to serve and protect!!!!
That's not acceptable. And it's obviously not true . A great many of these cops are sadists and psychopaths. And good people do not go along with murder, the harassment of citizens. and the enforcing of laws that are designed primarily to extort money from the citizen. You apparently do not know what evil looks like. The American people would be better off without them. We do not need an occupying force of thugs to protect us. The citizen can protect himself.
Even today, what do you think would happen if a criminal approached a citizen who is armed, and tried to rob him? The robber would most likely flee or end up dead. If the citizen is unarmed , the robber would most likely succeed in his endeavor. In the latter case, we see that having a police force does not prevent robbery or theft. And when we consider serial killers and rapists, we see that having a police force does not prevent such crimes from happening. The citizens can police themselves just as well as an occupying force of thugs in uniform. Furthermore , as we have been reminded of late, the police notwithstanding, if you are white and have money you can even rape women and get away with it.
Former CEO of Massey Energy Don Blankenship (who made 17.8 million in 2009, more than any other coal executive) was sentenced to a year in prison and given a $250,000 fine for the murder of 29 coal miners! (Most likely he will not serve a day in prison) Where were the police? Did they bring Blankenship to justice? No! How many men did Tamir Rice Kill? How many men did Sandra Bland kill? How many men did Walter Scott kill? The answer is "0". But they were all executed for the crime of being black.
Kathryn is right , yet anyone who thinks we would be better off in Anarchy , without cops to keep the peace of the vast majority against the lawless few , is blind , naïve and disconnected from all moral righteousness . Anarchy - is brightly illustrated in places like the Middle Eastern countries where the open and accepted abuses of women , children , certain religions , and every moral compass point in humanity is under attack by mostly lawless , morally challenged , men. are at fault ! Not men of authority .
Anarchy exists nowhere in the Middle East to my knowledge. You don't even know the definition of Anarchy. Anarchy is not synonymous with chaos. Educate yourself and be free.
Anarchy exists in many parts of the Middle East so your knowledge is limited by a lack of information.
Educate yourself and be free.
I have traveled most of middle East. Anarchy is about the opposite as you can get to anarchy.
To Be A Wealthy Slave
Anyone can say that fairies wear boots. That doesn't make it so. The Middle East consists of democracies , dictatorships,and destabilized governments like Iraq and Afghanistan where various factions struggle to gain control. There are no free Anarchist states in the Middle East that are free from the Imperialist aggression of the United States or the evil of Islamic extremism. Anarchy is freedom from government, war, and chaos. If you want to know what Anarchy is read the following works:
Henry David Thoreau: Walden and On The Duty of Civil Disobediance
http://wwnorton.com/college/history/ame … n-1854.pdf
Emma Goldman:Anarchism and Other Essays
https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library … her-essays
Peter Kropotkin: Anarchy
http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Ar … ideal.html
Once you review and comprehend this material, then, and only then can those of you who have been manipulated and deceived by tyrants truly understand the meaning of Anarchy. But study requires discipline and motivation, and these are two qualities that the average American does not possess. Just like a little dog that will do his tricks for his treats, the American only studies when that study leads to profit and material gain. The American is so blinded by money, and so inebriated with the possibility of an even greater wealth, that the tyranny and the oppression of government is eagerly embraced as a means to an end: to be a wealthy slave.
I suppose if we could agree to limit the definition of anarchy to only what you want to define it as then you'd have a point. However:
Anarchy-a state of disorder due to the absence of or nonrecognition of government.
That is the standard definition of the word. When you learn to use words correctly maybe you can participate in an intelligent conversation.
That is a perverse definition that has been promoted by tyrants. If you explore the Library of Congress you will also find essays and books written by 19th century "scholars" , Christian thinkers, and racist religious fanatics that "scientifically" and "theologically" explain why the white man is superior to the black man. Perhaps you agree with them. The fact that a definition, a mere soundbyte, has been written in a book doesn't necessarily mean it is factual.
That is why I provided the links. If you do the study you will have understanding. Otherwise you will content yourself with a lie. The original definition of Anarchy is from the Greek. And it simply means : "Without government".There is no positive or negative connotation attached to the definition.I am an educated person. But to educate yourself requires just a little bit of time and effort.
LOL. I point out that you are not using the term anarchy correctly and suddenly you suggest I think whites are superior? You've got a deeper comprehension problem than first appeared.
It is apparent that your purpose is to be in disagreement, just as many others who participate in these Forums. You are the one who does not comprehend. Please point out where I suggested such a thing. This is why people are having so much trouble in this country. A majority do not understand the English language. I gave an example of falsehoods that have been written and documented in the historical record. I said "Perhaps you agree with them". The word "Perhaps" expresses uncertainty, or a possibility, and nothing more. In other words, it is more of a question than a statement of fact or opinion. The correct and educated response from you would have simply been: "No, I do not agree" or "Yes, I do agree".
But your unwarranted response only reveals that you do not like my comment, and that you have no way to counter except with fiction and vitriol.
Look. I get where you are coming from. I simply disagree that yours is a valid point. A definition is what it is. Simply because so and so and such and such may use it in a different context from the agreed upon norm doesn't make that the norm. By insisting that these supersede the common usage of the word means you are the one who simply wants to disagree.
Either way, believe as you wish.
No, what it means is that there are human beings in this world who are "authorities" on various subjects. When I speak of the meaning of Anarchy, and what it "does not " mean, I am speaking as an authority; as someone who has spent many hours studying and reading, and contemplating this philosophy and way of life. You have based your opinion on a perverse definition that has been perpetuated by tyrants who have everything to gain by keeping the populace ignorant, docile, and complacent.
This is why there is so much violence and unrest in this country. Instead of listening to educated people who know what time it is, the majority continue to blindly follow tyrants, and people like Donald Trump. I am not a book, or an inanimate definition that you have found online. I am a living , breathing, authority. But you accept what is lifeless and dead over the living. This is a perfect example of why the U.S. is disintegrating right before your eyes. The greatest enemy of the American is his own arrogance.
But what is most telling is you will not follow a single link that I have provided . These links are like doorways to understanding. Yet, you would rather remain in darkness than open the door and step into the light. Fear will only continue to diminish your life.
LOL. You an authority. Okee dokee.
The reason I didn't follow your link is because the fact that you are wrong doesn't need to be researched. It is painfully obvious.
And, why do you insist on these tangents? What do Donald Trump followers have to do with your poor grasp of the English language?
Henry David Thoreau, Emma Goldman, and Peter Kropotkin were all giants among men. The fact that you would not acknowledge their genius, or even consider, or review what they have written is quite predictable. as your attitude exemplifies the majority. I understand that it may be invigorating to publicly denigrate someone who is far above your station, but at the end of the day, in the silence between four walls, there is no one else to blame, and there is nowhere that we can hide.
are you sure it is you who understands the English language?
1. c : to mention or imply as a possibility <suggested that he might bring his family>
The word "Perhaps" expresses uncertainty, or a possibility
That's what she accused you of doing. She said you suggested that she thinks whites are superior. Which is exactly what you did, because you are expressing a possibility that she thinks whites are superior. Again, refer to the dictionary definition of the word "suggest."
The same thing happened to me. I showed him numbers, he called me a racist. That reaction is not surprising to me given our political climate.
I find it more entertaining that he's repeatedly emphasized the fact that he's educated. Because that's what educated people do; they assert their education as a weapon to beat down on us mindless plebeians. Educated or intelligent people never doubt themselves or their content. Like this idiot Socrates here:
All I know is that I know nothing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunning%E … ger_effect
You are an idiot. The Sand Creek Massacre was carried out by "volunteers" on their last day of required service. Actual soldiers present at the attack refused to participate in the fighting precisely because there were no orders to do so, and no justification.
Didn't 150 natives die, mostly women and children?
That's really bad news for you Bruce, because since I'm obviously smarter than you, that makes you less than an idiot. That makes you idibitty !!!
What I would like to know is why you are so angry. Surely it couldn't be over an historical event. I would guess that you represent a particular group, race,nationality, or club, and feel that I have offended you. Or perhaps the girl or guy you are dating took off. Where's the beef Bruce? Would you like to share your anxiety with the entire world? I welcome you to let your hair down and let it all hang out. Maybe you're just having a bad day, and are really a very nice guy.
You guys are dividing words and meanings when all you have to understand is that it is each human heart that is inclusive of all human conditions , good and bad . There are perfect examples of all of the bias' hatred and prejudice right here in the forums. I have read very few opines that show a complete understanding of human failings .For the most part , You , you and you and including I ,are biased , prejudiced ,at times hateful and it matters not what " color ' any of us are . Black ,white or blue it matters not , the evils of humanity lie in each and every heart !
Yes there are assumed entitlement to being white. There is also downside, like false happiness from being over focus on money.
Then being charged twice as much because of the tourist price in the third World.
Many of my Latin friends have a good laugh when I tell them. We whites are suffering more than them. That's like Jesus telling the people in hell, he is suffering more than them.
Latino happiness comes from knowing that most of them own their own home, their family clossness and not indebted with heavy private debt and nation debt for life along with their children. They smile more often and don't stare at the ground so often like we do.
The are three kinds of people onhorseback. There are people who give a damn, those who don't give a damn, and those who like to pretend that they give a damn. The later category constitutes the majority here in the United States. Anyone can look at the decimated populations of the Indigenous here in North America and understand that something really wrong has been happening here for a very long time. Populations simply don't disappear for no reason. Populations do not of their own accord simply walk away from the land and the resources and willingly live on reservations. Neither do Africans magically show up on a strange continent far, far from their homeland in the middle of the night.
But at least on the face of it, it is not little green men who have set the stage, and who are committing all of these atrocities, and making all of these changes. I have been talking about the definition of a word because evil men, and the ignorant masses that follow them, attempt to cover up their evil deeds and motivations by perverting the meaning of words. It is very popular to say that Black Lives Matter is a racist organization, or that anyone who identifies the source of the problem here in America is a racist, a race baiter, someone who possesses a victim-mentality etc.. This method of trickery is something relatively new that the racists had not yet discovered during the Civil Rights movement of the 50's/60's. And many people, white and black, have fallen for this deception, and they have been silenced because of it.
We can see the same pervasive evil in the United Arab Emirates. It is no wonder that they would be sleeping with the Americans and the British, as they are all drinking from the same well. Just recently a young woman of the UAE who was gang raped was ordered to receive 200 lashes and 6 months in jail for being the victim of gang rape! The judges reasoned that she put herself in harms way and broke the law by not following the prescribed rules of conduct. The logic of the UAE in cases like this is the same logic that racist Americans use when considering the plight of the Indigenous and the African people. From the racist perspective it is always the victims fault.
The racist will bring up numbers and statistics (as we have seen here) to demonstrate that the black man is his own worst enemy. I have even heard Uncle Toms like Larry Elder express the same sentiment while commiserating about black on black violence in Chicago and the inner cities. But the superior intellect understands that you cannot put people in a pressure cooker, turn up the heat, and then expect to see good results. Elder, being the perfect meat puppet, has cited the broken black families, fatherless children, and the gang and drug culture as being at the root of the problem. But when we step back and look at the big picture, we see that these are only symptoms. When we look at numbers and statistics, such as have been presented in this thread, we are still only looking at the symptoms of the problem . And anyone should know that you cannot cure a catastrophic condition in the human body by simply treating the symptoms. Giving a man morphine will ease his pain, but it will not stop the cancer from growing. The black community cannot rise up while the KKK is patrolling their neighborhoods in squad cars, funneling drugs into their communities, and provoking violence against the police and among rival gangs. Before the black community can realize it's full potential, a system of white supremacy must be abolished..
Whites are afraid, they are surrounded by 86% of people of color in this world. Blacks will increase most in 20 years and whites will decrease to 9% of world's. There is karma for you. Mix all colors up and you got brown people in time. From traveling so much I'm color blind.
Whites are afraid? LOL. Doesn't sound very color blind to me.
Personally I'm fearless I told Trump and GW Bush team personally where to go with their bigotry and racism.
Since Trump came along look at all the up rasing about racism. To me skin color dose not matter yet in culture identity American are afraid of their skin and their class. If people were all equals and in their own individual ways of no harm. Greed and human race would never be an issue.
I agree, racism is a trivial pursuit. But unfortunately there are many people of various races who want very badly to be white. And many are truly white on the inside. It horrifies and angers them when people speak as I do, because they live for the approval and the acceptance of the white race. I am looking for no one's approval, nor am I trying to make Facebook Friends. I think I have made that very clear.
By the way, here is a good test: Ask your Facebook Friends for a dollar and see how many unfriend you, or even respond. Better yet, ask one of your real friends, or a relative for a dollar, and see what they do. People are so cheap and so evil; such liars and hypocrites. I am not surprised that they take pleasure in killing each other, or when they make excuses for the killing. I look forward to a peaceful death so that I will not have to look at them anymore, or listen to their idle chatter, or hear them boast about being free when they've got a brass ring in their nose, with a log chain and a fence post hanging from it.
No ! You just think you are and yet , read your own Lies . The greatest racists in America are often the minority who calls out racist !
That's what you want people to believe because you have no where else to go with your argument.
I can smell your fear. You can see the writing on the wall. In a couple of years you'll be a member of the largest minority in the U.S.A.. You'll have great grandchildren, nieces, and nephews, named Achmed,Abdul,Fahim, Fatima,Jose, and Alejandro. Karma ... it's a beautiful thing!
"The largest minority in the US" ............anyone else read immaturity into that statement , don't continue to shoot yourself in the foot wrench , it's just looking worse and worse for you . I have no fear ....remember ? I am the Ali of the white race . The quintessential well armed militia . No my friend , this entire hysteria that you and yours are projecting with the help of the Disney media is but a flash in the pan .........do you know what that means , I do . I have no fear of that which comes .
Any reference to human slavery is but a self- disgust with the self- addictions you all face at being totally encased in a puritan work ethic that WE ALL have to swallow , try not to self hate so much , its so not- cool . its not self enriching , Really it's simply a cry out in the long night of darkness of humanity ............I feel for you though . Advice , get with the program , stop whining like Sissy -Mary's , we're al victims of ourselves .
There is hope for you yet ! oh......gotta go ,.time to go to work.
Hummmm wrenchB, I can't imagine there being any truth of governmental conspiracy in any of these killings. I prefer you to write of how we can resolve these differences and have love for one another. Thank you. Money and power are not everything...
Money and power are everything when these are used to subjugate, and to kill. And what is there to love about evil? You only need review the historical record to understand what this government is capable of.
First of all, a majority are assuming that these men are dead. But how do you know they are dead? Because you saw them fall in a cheap video? Have you ever seen Die Hard, or Rambo, or any other action movie? It looks very real doesn't it. Do you realize how easy it would be to script and stage the killing of 5 Dallas Cops? I assure you, it would be far easier to do, and far less expensive than an action scene from a Rambo movie. And are you not aware of the witness protection program? Witnesses are given new identities, SSN's, new jobs, and relocated. Sometimes, even their families do not know where they have gone. This is one possible scenario.
And as I may have already commented, if they were killed it could very well be a government OP. I have no doubt elements in the U.S. government are behind 9/11 and the Oklahoma City bombing. And if you don't believe that, then you cannot deny the Sand Creek Massacre, Wounded Knee, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, and the Waco Massacre. These are all well documented crimes against humanity that illustrate the level of barbarity that the U.S. government is capable of. And if that is not enough, just look around wherever you go. How many "Indians do you see?" Unless you are near a major res, you can travel all day long and not see a single one of us. Why? Because our people were exterminated . Over 100 million by the dawn of the 20th century. We are all out of "Love", and it won't be coming back.
The point is, with such a track record, it is not a great leap to suppose that they would sacrifice 5 cops to achieve the desired outcome: to discredit Black Lives Matter and to provoke civil unrest so that they may justify Martial Law. You speak the way you do because you are a good man. But these men are not good men. If you have not read the Patriot Act then read it. If you have not Read Executive Order 13603 which once again legalizes slavery in the United States, please read it.This government has never been a friend to the African or the Indigenous. Now the Euro-Americans are about to realize and experience an evil hand of oppression that my people have known for over 500 years.
Perhaps an old safety first photo or a metaphorical representation of innocence betrayed. Either way, this child, without supervision and in grave danger.
Anarchy might work if all men were angels … and children were allowed to be what they are in their essence.
Boundaries must be set without destroying their joy of life.
The knife should be taken away in this case and the word "NO!" said very firmly.
Why can't people accept the simple facts?
White cops kill disproportionate numbers of young black men.
A movement has grown to protest this.
During a legitimate demonstration in Dallas, a gunman saw an opportunity to carry out an attack on police that he had long intended.
Cops were murdered. Families were deprived of fathers.The whole business of being a cop and also of being young and black got harder.
The issues that that arise from the shooting are difficult enough without idiotic conspiracy theories.
You think it is a conspiracy theory because an individual or agency in a position of authority that you trust didn't tell you first. If I would have told you that the government was going to use CS gas to murderer little children at the Branch Davidian Compound two weeks prior to the incident, I am sure you would have thought I was nuts. I would have too! The government doesn't go around gassing men, women, and children do they? But now we all know they do. And if you have ever watched the grilling of Janet Reno by Sonny Bono, you'll understand that the bitch couldn't provide one good reason why it was necessary to slaughter all those innocent people. Also read the Patriot Act, and Executive Order 13603 which legalized slavery in America for the first time since the end of the Civil War.
Sonny Bono Grills Reno: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hswcbvx2Z8c
There are certainly conspiracies, usually involving small numbers of people with a profoundly shared interest.
Conspiracies are hard to sustain when large numbers of people are involved. There are a remarkable number of individuals on this planet who believe in the truth. There are also a lot of journalists and writers keen to make a name for themselves by exposing wrong doing.
Given how much harm conspiracy theories do, sensible people need some serious evidence before making these kinds of accusations.
You have none.
I have a horn of plenty! You need to read more, and get out of the house once and a while.The FBI issued a warning in 2006 that the Ku Klux Klan had infiltrated police departments throughout the U.S.. Are you suggesting that such information is not reliable? And why do you suppose they would go to the trouble of doing that? To hand out parking tickets? The Klan is out to destroy the black community which has always been it's goal.
The goal of the government is to subjugate and control the populace. That's not theory, only fact. That's why the police have been militarized, that's why taxes are levied against you, that's why you pay all manner of fees and fines. It's all part of a system of control. Now they are coming for the guns; namely assault weapons that could pose a threat to Martial Law.The Patriot Act will help to insure that citizens suspected of challenging government tyranny will be detained indefinitely without habeas corpus. EO 13603 insures that citizens can be forced to work in labor camps and on public projects with no monetary compensation. "Force" + "No Compensation" = Slavery. All fact, no fiction. And all verifiable. Police across the country are also ordering Drones to use in the increased surveillance of cities, towns, and rural areas. All fact , no fiction.
The government appears to be at odds with the Klan, but they both have their fingers in the pie. Provoking violent public reaction to police killings, as well as the fear of "terrorist attacks" appears to be the governments strategy. With enough violence and fear generated the majority will willingly accept Martial Law as the lesser evil. All you have to do is fill in the blanks. Do you really think that CNN or Fox News is going to do that for you?
There is a genuine and increasing threat to the well being of ordinary people, and democratic values, as wealth and power becomes concentrated in fewer and fewer hands.
But you are not helping anyone with wild imaginings and wild exposition.
Train yourself to communicate with others in a credible way and you might be of some value.
I get WB
I think veteran artist are vital to society and like truth warriors can express for the people, things to the King without having their heads chop off or be locked up in a cage.
If your king is not working, why not just get rid of your King, or better get rid of Kings, all together. Remember Artist have contributes and influence human civilization far greater and longer than politricks and Religion has.
You only know this because you are also an artist. I cannot fathom the life of a man who only uses his mind for practical purposes, such as mating with females, and working his job to collect his peanuts. I could not live in such a manner. The human mind is very mysterious, and there are many things yet undocumented and widely unknown about the power of the human mind.
Those who rule over us are tyrants. I cannot believe that you,Castlepaloma, would send the sons and daughters of Americans to fight and die in a desert for oil and money.And I would not even consider such an evil plan. But these are the evil men that the people elect to rule over them. It can only mean that the people are very stupid, or that the people are also evil, or perhaps all of the above. It would be better for the people if they forcibly removed these tyrants from office, and imprisoned them for life. Then we could go look at them on the weekends, like monkeys at the zoo. They deserve such a fate far more than the monkeys.
I just heard someone say, "The high level of the police is bad, the low level of the police is good." That rang true to me because of Unions (with political agendas).
by Christopher J Wood 21 months ago
What is your opinion of the Black Lives Matter movement?We all believe that law enforcement officers need to be held accountable and unjustified killings by police can not be tolerated. However, if the organization truely holds protecting the lives of blacks as its mission, wouldn't it make...
by Caitlyn Booth 4 years ago
Why is saying #AllLivesMatter considered racist?I see this everywhere: on Twitter, on forums, and on the news. I am asking this out of pure curiosity and confusion, because I don't see anything racist about the statement/hashtag.
by Patricia Scott 3 years ago
Do you think that "Black Lives Matter" is designed to bring us closer or to further divide us?I am hopeful that we can find a way to live together on this planet respecting each other and valuing each other.
by VC L Veasey 4 years ago
Why Do So Many Black People Say Whites are racist Without Questioning If They Really Are Racist?
by Peeples 4 years ago
Is it seen as racist to say all lives matter now?I saw someone called a racist on twitter for sharing a story with the #AllLivesMatter. Is it somehow seen politically incorrect now to care about all lives? I'm a bit confused. I see this as a good thing, not bad.
by IslandBites 6 months ago
“We are just gonna go out and start slaughtering them f****** n******. I can’t wait. God I can’t wait,” Piner stated, according to the documents. Moore responded that he would not do that, which Piner stated “I’m ready.”Piner then explained to Moore, the documents state, that the country needed a...
Copyright © 2021 HubPages Inc. and respective owners. Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners. HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc. HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.
HubPages Inc, a part of Maven Inc.
|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|