Reply With QuoteNevertheless, it's the feeling I get from you and others. It really bothers me.
As I'm generally a right winger (just not in the US sense), why would I advance such a ridiculous argument? The US conservative movement has a deep well of racism on its extremes, pointing that out feels like pointing out that the sky is blue.Originally Posted by The Mad Monk
Nevertheless, it's the feeling I get from you and others. It really bothers me.
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.
Well apologies for that dude, despite your libertarian views being pretty incomprehensible to me most of the time, I've always thought you were a decent guy.Nevertheless, it's the feeling I get from you and others. It really bothers me.
I'd say it's a racist country in general. I know I can't stand Welsh people.
Do not take anything I say seriously. It's just the Internet. It's not real life.
Is it okay if a rich black radio host (who is too young to have lived through segregation) spouts racist comments?
I would expect racism to be more common on the right because racism is anti-egalitarian in nature.
That implies that the right is defined by anti-egalitarianism.
How do you define egalitarian?
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.
Whatever the dictionary defines it as, I agree with it.
Well, you see, that's the problem...
...do you see it?Egalitarianism in economics is a controversial phrase with conflicting potential meanings. It may refer either to equality of opportunity, the view that the government ought not to discriminate against citizens or hinder opportunities for them to prosper, or the quite different notion of equality of outcome, a state of economic affairs in which the government promotes equal prosperity for all citizens.
The free-market economist Milton Friedman supports equality-of-opportunity economic egalitarianism. Economist John Maynard Keynes supported more equal outcomes.
An early example of equality-of-outcome economic egalitarianism is Xu Xing, a scholar of the Chinese philosophy of Agriculturalism, who supported the fixing of prices, in which all similar goods and services, regardless of differences in quality and demand, are set at exactly the same, unchanging price.[8]
In the years following World War II, the social democracies of Europe have all adoped egalitarian programs designed to promote general access to health care and education.
[edit] PoliticalEgalitarianism in politics can be of at least two forms. One form is equality of persons in right, sometimes referred to as natural rights, and John Locke is sometimes considered the founder of this form.[9]
Another form is a distributive egalitarianism in which the wealth created by labor is organized and controlled in some equal manner. Karl Marx is considered an influential proponent of this form of egalitarianism.[10]
[edit] PhilosophicalAt a cultural level, egalitarian theories have developed in sophistication and acceptance during the past two hundred years. Among the notable broadly egalitarian philosophies are socialism, communism, anarchism, libertarianism, left-libertarianism, social liberalism and progressivism, all of which propound economic, political, and legal egalitarianism. Several egalitarian ideas enjoy wide support among intellectuals and in the general populations of many countries. Whether any of these ideas have been significantly implemented in practice, however, remains a controversial question.
Last edited by The Mad Monk; May 1, 2012 at 14:50.
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.
Yes. I should create my own definitions of words. Then maybe I would be more like Ben.
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.
Now I see your edit. "Equality of opportunity" as defined in your quote is a misnomer and it only offer a very limited form of equality because if the government doesn't do anything there will be a huge disparity in the opportunities different people have in life.
I thought you might need a little more.
Is it possible to have both equality of opportunity and equality of result at the same time?
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.
As you've defined those terms, no. But if one person is capable of achieving huge results and another person is only capable of achieving meager results, they never really had equal opportunities to begin with. And the person with more results has options available to them that the person with meager results doesn't have, so they aren't equally free either.I thought you might need a little more.
Is it possible to have both equality of opportunity and equality of result at the same time?
I'd certainly have a lot less sympathy for it. I don't think its something that has a really clear answer to be honest.
Yeah, because you seem to think a black person has reasons to be a racist but a white person doesn't. Like blacks never do anything wrong or racist. That's circular. Not really suprising coming from you, sorry to say, but it's true.So its racist to understand why some black people may hold understandably racist views? Good reasoning.
We must be concerned not merely about who murdered them, but about the system, the way of life, the philosophy which produced these murderers. - Martin Luther King Jr. Eulogy for the Martyred Children (1963)
Is that something that needs to be corrected?
"We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work...After eight years of this Administration, we have just as much unemployment as when we started... And an enormous debt to boot!" — Henry Morgenthau, Franklin Delano Roosevelt's Treasury secretary, 1941.
What a bunch of dribble. People like you will always justify racism and hatred. There will never be a world without racism. The only thing you can do is stop it for yourself. Stop being a racist and stop saying it's justified.
We must be concerned not merely about who murdered them, but about the system, the way of life, the philosophy which produced these murderers. - Martin Luther King Jr. Eulogy for the Martyred Children (1963)
no, it aint murder
its self defense
Take some man pills and anti-paranoia drugs.Nevertheless, it's the feeling I get from you and others. It really bothers me.
“As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
"Capitalism ho!"
Do blacks in America have more reason/justification to be racist than whites? Yes, I'd say they certainly do. Does that make it right? No, not really, but its certainly more understandable. I do find it especially telling that you don't seem to understand why that might be the case though.
Answer this for me, would you find it at least understandable if the Jews felt uneasy/hostile towards the German people?
No.
I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio
There is no justification for racism. If there were I should be a racist. A lot of people should be racist because some black person did something wrong to them. But just because an individual does something wrong to you doesn't justify you harming innocent people.
I don't hold peoples feelings against them. If any Jew were to use violence or encourage others to do so, it would certainly be wrong.Answer this for me, would you find it at least understandable if the Jews felt uneasy/hostile towards the German people?
We must be concerned not merely about who murdered them, but about the system, the way of life, the philosophy which produced these murderers. - Martin Luther King Jr. Eulogy for the Martyred Children (1963)
I feel uneasy around Germans. I thought everyone was like that. Even Germans.
“As a lifelong member of the Columbia Business School community, I adhere to the principles of truth, integrity, and respect. I will not lie, cheat, steal, or tolerate those who do.”
"Capitalism ho!"
If people are suffering in poverty, I would say yes.
There is no justification for being a racist. If a black man mugged you, that wouldn't make racism against blacks more justifiable.
First I'm inherently dishonest, now I'm inherently racist. How many fantasies do you need to feed for you to be in the right here? How about you actually cite an example of me lying, or of me being racist.
Personally, I don't think you're quite as racist as I previously posted. I just don't think you've thought your views through at all. Let's look at this post:
The idea that white supremacism has not given rise to vast amounts of anger and resentment is pretty ****ing stupid to be quite honest.
More accurately, white supremacism is part of the explanation for why black supremacism exists. It is not the only explanation or reason.
Incidentally, I can't really be blamed for your bad writing. Here's what you wrote earlier:
For American whites to squeal about how terribly racist it is for those horrible civil rights leaders to actually say bad things about white people, is absolutely laughable. Wounds run deep.
Here's what you're writing now (and I repeat the previous quote intentionally):
The idea that white supremacism has not given rise to vast amounts of anger and resentment is pretty ****ing stupid to be quite honest.
Now, you've either changed your position here or you haven't. Are "American whites" to blame, or are American "white supremacists" to blame? The two are not one and the same. They never were, and they're certainly not right now. Keep in mind that the American people have elected white supremacists to the office of President before--like Woodrow "Birth of a Nation" Wilson. But that doesn't mean that every single person, merely by reason of pale skin, is or ever believed in the ideology of white supremacism.
It is plain racist to suppose that every American white is responsible for, and thus cannot justly complain of, black supremacism. It is precisely this latter idea that is implicit in your statement that it is "laughable" for "American whites" to "squeal" about "horrible things" that "civil rights leaders" say.
In retrospect I fully concede the likelihood you did not think this idea through to its logical conclusion, and thus, are not an open, explicit and coherent advocate for, say, refusing to enforce the law against the victims of black supremacist violence and intimidation.
You have also written that the actions of black supremacists are "comprehensible", but that you do not condone them. Well, of course they are comprehensible. Black supremacists commit racist actions because they are racist. They grew up in a political culture borne of slavery, so they were often ill-educated and therefore prone to accepting conspiratorial or nonsensical explanations for how the world worked. And in the face of racial intimidation the best explanation they could come up with was that everyone was agains them; they cast about for the usual victims: migrants, Jews, Whites, everyone. The New Black Panthers are simply the logical outgrowth of black supremacism--borne, in turn, of white supremacism. But all that doesn't matter. What matters is that black supremacism exists and that it must be combatted; and that those who excuse its existence and refuse to condemn its leaders must be named and shamed.
Further, the idea that supremacists of any colour are not entitled to the protection of the law is simply a recipe for vigilantism, mob justice and racially inspired violence. Supremacists may not believe in the equal protection of the law but they are entitled to it as is any other person. Conversely they must be subjected to the equal enforcement of the law against them--or else their power, willingness to commit violence and intimidation will expand.
Further, you mistake advocacy for a particular outcome with advocacy for the ideas that underly it. Advocacy for black entitlement to the equal protection of the law is commendable and necessary. But Sharpton and Jackson's open racism against Jews, Koreans, Chinese, and Whites is part of an agenda of black supremacism; for them black entitlement to the equal protection of the law is merely a first step. Intimidating others and gaining power based on racial patronage is their goal. You don't appear to understand this salient fact.
You also don't appear to understand that the danger posed by the New Black Panthers lies in the fact that it is openly tolerated by so-called "civil rights" groups that are headed by racists like Sharpton. The members of groups headed by Sharpton are either ignorant of his racism (unlikely), cynics (possible) or racists themselves (equally possible). You mistake advocacy for civil rights with advocacy for race-based privileges and patronage.
Lastly, you are completely unable to comprehend, let alone condemn, an Administration that has openly endorsed Al Sharpton--a known and open racist; and accepted, without comment, the endorsement of the New Black Panthers: a group it chose to march with and refused to take legal action against.
And I do not doubt that the Administration's logic was not far from your own when its members thought of Al Sharpton. I do not doubt that those who refused to take action also thought:
For American whites to squeal about how terribly racist it is for those horrible civil rights leaders to actually say bad things about white people, is absolutely laughable. Wounds run deep.
And, by necessary implication, I do not doubt that they also thought somewhere along these lines (I do not quote from you, but merely rephrase as necessary):
"For American whites to squeal about how terribly racist it is for those black supremacists like the New Black Panthers leaders threaten to kill every white person alive, or perhaps plant pipe bombs in front of stores owned by Asians, is absolutely laughable. They're fighting for black people. Why shouldn't we march with them? Why should we take legal action to prevent them from walking about with nightsticks, calling out threats against whites, next to polling booths? Wounds run deep."
Last edited by Zevico; May 2, 2012 at 08:45.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier
Why was he castigated for claiming Jews kept him away from Obama? Because he's a racist.
Because he's an anti-American radical whose hobbies include visiting Cuba and praising Fidel Castro.
Because he thinks Jesus was black, not because there is any evidence for same, but because "so it must be": in short, a form of black supremacism mixed with so-called "social justice" theology.
"You say that it is your custom to burn widows. Very well. We also have a custom: when men burn a woman alive, we tie a rope around their necks and we hang them. Build your funeral pyre; beside it, my carpenters will build a gallows. You may follow your custom. And then we will follow ours."--General Sir Charles James Napier
They hurt my Daddy really bad.
"I say shoot'em all and let God sort it out in the end!
Is that what its called, "advancing the arguement". Funny I thought it was akin to the retort most commonly used by my 5 year old daughter when the inevitable claims of 'she was mean to me' were the basis for her "understandably" pushing her sister down a flight of stairs.
I failed as a parent that day for not realizing that it was a reasonable expectation of my daughters behavior and should have seen the brilliance of her logic and ability to 'advance the arguement' accordingly. Additional failures that day likely are as follows:
1) A rush to see if my older daughter was severely injured. Heck she was priveledged by virtue of birth she gets what she deserves. (she after all was stronger and more experienced than the 5 year old)
2) Failure to chastise my older daughter for her incindiary behaviour that led to the clearly understandable and justified behavior of my 5 yr old
3) Failure to tell my older daughter to stop the whining and playing the martyr. Clearly the suck it up you have nothing to whine about makes things so much better.
4) it goes of course without saying that since I punished my 5 year old for inappropriate behavior, the clearly false premise of minimal social expectations should have be voided when faced with 'understandable' circumstances. Call social services immediately.
Last edited by Ogie Oglethorpe; May 2, 2012 at 09:35.
"Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson
“In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks