Unspoken black/white segregation: Choice or societal structure?

[MrFun]

I like all the strawman arguments and slippery slope arguments on this thread.

And I like all the connotative words that some people have used in their arguments as well.

I also like the flaming and trolling that has happened between some of the participants on this thread.

Keep up the excellent work, guys.

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by faded glory
Yes, yes, affirmative action never hurt nobody

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,49793,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,40199,00.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,33746,00.html

Shame there were thousands of these. I could only pick 3. I wish I could get 100.....but I think ide rather be golfing in an hour.

Is that the best you can do? The articles deal with cases that are still before the courts, in other words, whether the plaintiffs have suffered has not yet been proven.

The first article deals with a university where the student body is 98 per cent black, and yet almost half of the profs are not black. Still the non-black profs claim they face discrimination.

In the University of Michigan case, IIRC, the university argues that colour is simply one of many factors that are considered when people are being assessed for administration.

Universities routinely have a policy of giving a preference to people whose parents are alumni. Funny how we don't hear people complaining about this type of discrimination.

Universities also routinely give preference to people from certain geographical areas. Again, we don't hear people complaining about this type of discrimination.

With regards to AA, we are faced with choosing between two evils: we can let a form of racism that serves no good to exist or we can choose a form of racism that is design to reach a positive goal of equality.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by Boris Godunov

Who says you can only be proud of your own achievements? My mom says she's proud of me for things I've done. Should I tell her to shut the f*ck up for trying to steal my glory?

Seriously, this is dumb. What's wrong with Black people being proud of their heritage? Nothing. And don't give me crap that white people can't be, as I see every white group in NYC having their own parade day. Germans, Swedes, Greeks, Irish...they all have parades.

The difference, however, is that Blacks in the U.S. were raped of their cultural and national identity by slavery. Ergo "Black" is the only thing they have for ethnicity.

Boris, we finally agreed on something although I'm not sure I would have put it so colourfully (no pun intended). It must be right

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Somalis are not part of the Black culture. Neither are Nigerians, nor Xhosa, nor any other African culture. Black culture is a unique American culture, a hybrid of various African cultures as well as Scottish, English, and (in Louisiana) French. West Indians in the US do not consider themselves Black, even if they are black.

Get it? Got it? Good.

When I read this I was reminded of the bagful of forms that must be dealt with when applying for money from NIH. There's one where you have to describe the racial and ethnic background of the patients you're studying. Two of the groups are African-Americans and blacks. It took me quite a while to figure out what it might mean.

[SpencerH]

Originally posted by BunnyGrrl

When black pride is about killing and/or subjugating members of other races , i am a firm opponant. white pride is never about being glad that white people have such a great society and ONLY that. White pride is about white supremacy (which of course is still very alive and well).

Exactly, black-pride is akin to Irish-Americanism.

Believe it or not, there are very many black people who consider white people not to be trusted. Many feel that given the chance, any white person would sell them up the river if push came to shove. Given that world view, it is not surprising that many black people would not choose to become friends with white people. You can not live in a world where most people still call black people morally and intellectually inferior and expect blacks to wholehartedly and with no reservations embrace every white person who approaches them without a noose. Most racism these days is subtle and harder to root out.

I thinks its hard for honestly "fair minded" white folk to understand this point of view, and even to understand that it exists. My own awakening to it came when I found out that the atrocity of the Tuskegee Study had real impact on patient participation in research studies and trust i their (mostly white) physicians.

[orange]

Originally posted by BunnyGrrl
Your initial question was answered, quite well i might add, on the first page of this thread. Many flame wars later, the subject became more about the legitmacy of black pride v. white pride.

Complex questions are never answered in one post, or even 30.

I don't think it's about the legitimacy of black pride v. white pride, I think it's about double standards.

When black pride is about killing and/or subjugating members of other races , i am a firm opponant. white pride is never about being glad that white people have such a great society and ONLY that.

But if it was, would you and the others still be against it?

Don't get me wrong here, I don't see a need for any kind of 'racial' or 'sexual prefernece' based pride...but I don't like double standards that one type or pride is pride, and another type of pride is racism. There were reasons in the past for minorities to have groups to protect their rights under law or even to rally for equal rights, but in today's society everyone IS equal under law.

Now, in practice people may not be equal, and I understand that, which is why I do see a need for organizations to keep an eye on things, to make sure that equality is being practiced. However, when organizations are racially named IE "Black student Union" what you do is ostracize those who would otherwise participate in the cause.

I have said that I don't know what black student unions do/discuss...I don't know if you have attended university in the past, and if so, if you were a member of the black student union...but if you were I'd certainly like to hear about it. What goes on, what the goals are, etc...

I also feel that if groups like the NAACP exist to protect African Americans against what they see as crimes against them, then a group such as the NAAWP should not automatically be labeled 'racist' ONLY because it's goal is to protect the interests of whites. If through it's policies and goals the organization proves to be racist, then by all means it can be labeled as such.

White pride in and of itself is not a racist thing.

White pride is about white supremacy (which of course is still very alive and well).

That's not entirely true. Though in practice it may have been used to promote organizations such as the KKK, etc. that does not necessarily mean that all white pride is racism...else I say that black pride is racism becuase of people like Malcom X and groups like the Black Panthers.

Believe it or not, there are very many black people who consider white people not to be trusted. Many feel that given the chance, any white person would sell them up the river if push came to shove. Given that world view, it is not surprising that many black people would not choose to become friends with white people.

WHY? Why would an African American not trust me, someone who has never owned a slave, someone who has never supported unequal rights, someone who doesn't even care about skin color simply becuase I'm white. Isn't that JUST AS RACIST as a white person not trusting a black person simply because he/she is black??? Isn't that an AWFUL preconception to judge all whites by?

You can not live in a world where most people still call black people morally and intellectually inferior and expect blacks to wholehartedly and with no reservations embrace every white person who approaches them without a noose.

Oh please, 'most people'?? I want to know what area of the US you live in where 'most people' consider blacks to be intellectually and morally inferior.

And I still say it's just as racist to judge a white on his color the way you say blacks do, as it is to judge an african american on his color the way you imply whites do.

Most racism these days is subtle and harder to root out.

Such as...

And if i sound a bit militant it is because i am. Having white friends (including and especially my bf) has made me see first hand the EXTREMELY different way this country treats blacks v. whites v. latinos v. asians...etc. It was only in another country did i feel entirely american and not black first. (and by black people's standards, i aint very black )

Well, I would disagree there as well.

I can see the distinction between blacks and asians as minorities, as asians do better in school, have higher University attendance rates, and are economically better off than African Americans(statistically speaking, of course)

But hispanics are on par, or possibly even lower, in these figures than African Americans.

Ultimately I feel that no law should be made to help a single racial group better itself, whites blacks hispanics orientals whatever...however I DO support the redistribution of wealth to areas of lower education/poverty/crime/etc. to balance the scales, becuase I don't feel that equal opportunity exists amongst economic classes. I DO feel that racially, equality exists in America, and in cases where it doesn't, appropriate action through the law can be and almost always is taken.

[orange]

Originally posted by MrFun


I like all the strawman arguments and slippery slope arguments on this thread.

And I like all the connotative words that some people have used in their arguments as well.

I also like the flaming and trolling that has happened between some of the participants on this thread.

Keep up the excellent work, guys.

Well if it isn't MrFun on his high horse yet again.

Ever notice how in every debate thread you proudly wave the banner and yell "strawman" and "slipperly slope"

Instead of posting the same damn thing in every single debate thread, why don't you explain which arguments you feel are 'strawman' arguments, and which you feel are 'slipperly slope' arguments, and actually post reasons that you feel they don't prove anything.

I'm sooooo sick of seeing this same copy paste job every time I walk into a debate thread. Sometimes I wonder if you even know what the hell a strawman or slipperly slope argument is, or if you just like to throw out baseless terms.

[chequita guevara]

For all this, white pride should be treated like Black pride crap, no one has yet pointed to a single white pride group that isn't a white supremicist organization. The difference is not in the potential, it is in the reality. Orange as long as you're defending the NAAWP, why don't you defend the Ayran Nations, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Nazis. The NAAWP is not a white pride group like the Black Panthers were a Black pride group. It is a white supremicist organization founded by David Duke and Bo Gritz (one the former head of the KKK and the other the head of the white supremacists Populist Party--and who also thinks that the Rambo movies are about him).

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by orange
Oh please, 'most people'?? I want to know what area of the US you live in where 'most people' consider blacks to be intellectually and morally inferior.

I can see the distinction between blacks and asians as minorities, as asians do better in school, have higher University attendance rates, and are economically better off than African Americans(statistically speaking, of course)

But hispanics are on par, or possibly even lower, in these figures than African Americans.

Can you provide proof to back up your statements? If not then you have provided proof that blacks are considered to be intellectually inferior.

[MrFun]

Orange, you want some examples, ok:

1) Cal and GP are two specific people who have presented my claims with their own words so as to create straw man arguments by claiming that I support something that I really do not support.
2) Imran had to correct someone on the top of page 7 to make sure no one would create a straw man argument out of his comment.
3) There are two or three people on this thread, and on my my thread who seem to be increasingly adept at calling me names instead of arguing legitimately. I have not called anyone whom I disagree with, on this thread, or my thread, any names.
4) There are some people who are using the extreme form of black supremacy, and trying to apply this to the mainstream, moderate black pride organizations, which is another form of a straw man argument.

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
For all this, white pride should be treated like Black pride crap, no one has yet pointed to a single white pride group that isn't a white supremicist organization. The difference is not in the potential, it is in the reality. Orange as long as you're defending the NAAWP, why don't you defend the Ayran Nations, the Ku Klux Klan, and the Nazis. The NAAWP is not a white pride group like the Black Panthers were a Black pride group. It is a white supremicist organization founded by David Duke and Bo Gritz (one the former head of the KKK and the other the head of the white supremacists Populist Party--and who also thinks that the Rambo movies are about him).

Thanks for this information, Chegitz. Now I am more convinced than ever about the wastefulness of the NAAWP since this organization was founded by white supremacists.

[TCO]

My only point was that I don't care about the "historic victimcy argument...or even the "group victim" argument. Since you have already conceded the "historic victim arguement" is irrelevant, I am satisfied.

If you can't follow this, I can't help you. Go take some tougher classes that stretch your brain a little more...

[orange]

MrFun - Henry Ford was a known anti-semite. Does that make his corporation a waste?

Che - I had a big response typed up and then AOHell froze on me I'll try to get around to retyping it sometime soon

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by MrFun
Thanks for this information, Chegitz. Now I am more convinced than ever about the wastefulness of the NAAWP since this organization was founded by white supremacists.

Sometimes I get the feeling that no one ever pays any attention to me. Very early on after Cali mentioned these wastes of protoplasm I said that they were a white supremacy organization.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by orange
MrFun - Henry Ford was a known anti-semite. Does that make his corporation a waste?

While he was in charge he funded the Nazis in Germany. Under the Nazi regime, Ford Europe used slave labor. You can't use this example to try and disassociate a known white supremacy group from its white supremicist founders. It's not that old of an organization, and it was part and parcel of Duke and Gritz's attempt to make white supremacy more respectable by saying it's really only about whie pride. Of course, when he didn't think he was being recorded, Duke said (not the exact quote), Now you boys now I wanna string up a ****** like the rest of you, but I can't go saying that in public.

I am serious. As long as you continue to defend that organization, you may was well defend the Klan, which also says it's only about white pride, as well as the White Aryan Resitence and other such white pride groups. If you'd studied hate groups like I have, you'd be well aware that white pride has been nothing more than a code word for white supremacy since day one. You cannot seperate the two.

Sorry your response got eaten.

[TCO]

Originally posted by chegitz guevara


Sometimes I get the feeling that no one ever pays any attention to me. Very early on after Cali mentioned these wastes of protoplasm I said that they were a white supremacy organization.

I noticed. Just letting you know that...