The black community

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,790
✟225,690.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
. - since his argument was that the "very aware and always socially and politically cognizant American majority" would never allow such a person to run for office. But, of course, it happened scores of times, and it is still happening. I also replied with this:



We only know of these people because of people diligently working to find this information; there are still possibly as many working in political positions of which we are unaware. Moreover, since the replier stated rather emptily that "The Klan no longer have any political power in the USA,"
You have obviously misunderstood me. I never suggested that someone who is keeping their Klan ties secret would never become suscessful in office, I was making the point that the public would not vote for someone if they knew they were members of the Klan. Which is why some of the examples you listed, as soon as their Klan ties became public, they were dismissed simply because of their ties with the Klan. There was a time in history when in some places you couldn't hold any kind of office unless you had the backing of the Klan. Now it has the opposite effect; Klan membership is a detriment.

K
 
Upvote 0

intojoy

Well-Known Member
Jun 26, 2013
1,612
54
✟2,069.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
Someone asked if blacks were better off 50 years ago than today. I haven't been watching them outside of pernell Whitaker or evander Holyfield (two believers). But is like to give my observation on that question. Obviously it was much worse then for brothers because of the idiots running around thinking that they were better, faster, stronger, smarter. However looking at what democracy had to offer a group of people who had the unique history of being enslaved by their fellow countrymen, the fact is that democracy is not God's plan for humanity and it's evident in the lack of ability to better the black community as a whole. Yes other groups have societal challenges like fatherless homes but only the black people had been enslaved, demonized and oppressed by America which is why it presents such a test case for the democratic experiment. Democracy will only work when the majority of the populace are moral people. Once the majority becomes immoral democracy moves from being a moral system of prosperity into a pragmatic society where one only does what's right as it benefits themselves. From pragmatism it will move into hedonism and from hedonism to anarchy and finally military dictatorship. People laugh at the idea of paying blacks money for their ancestors slavery, me too, but its only laughable because we've become and gone beyond pragmatism. If 50 years ago the government did something like giving blacks special dispensations to start businesses without taxation for a period of time then it would have changed the black community as some stereotype it today. I don't have any confidence in our politicians but I'm glad I was born American and I thank God for the grace to live here and I'm especially grateful for her armed forces. Too bad the Gov doesn't give a scenario to the veterans to start business similar to my example, they won't.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
You have obviously misunderstood me. I never suggested that someone who is keeping their Klan ties secret would never become suscessful in office, I was making the point that the public would not vote for someone if they knew they were members of the Klan. Which is why some of the examples you listed, as soon as their Klan ties became public, they were dismissed simply because of their ties with the Klan. There was a time in history when in some places you couldn't hold any kind of office unless you had the backing of the Klan. Now it has the opposite effect; Klan membership is a detriment.

K

I would agree with this. Any thought of an individual being associated with the Klan, would kill any chance of holding public office, especially one with any significance.

Another common killer of success in running for a prominent political office, is also claiming one is a non-believer. Those folks are avoided like the plague.
 
Upvote 0

Lollerskates

Junior Member
May 2, 2013
2,992
250
✟4,340.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I would agree with this. Any thought of an individual being associated with the Klan, would kill any chance of holding public office, especially one with any significance.

Another common killer of success in running for a prominent political office, is also claiming one is a non-believer. Those folks are avoided like the plague.

Wait for it....



Wait for it....




Wait for it....







We agree on something :). At least, I think we do.


Concerning your points, I have problems with American politics in regards to elections and "scandals." It is, I believe at least tangentially close to your points mentioned.

To me, the Anthony Wiener/Carlos Danger saga is ridiculous. Last time I checked, Wiener was a human; humans make mistakes and mess up most all of the time. What really get me sort of angry is how the general public will vilify Wiener's shenanigans so much so that he loses a race, or resigns hypocritically. It is an anthem that the "government is corrupt." Yet, the masses expect pristine-perfect candidates to choose from. It is especially contradictory when campaigns (whether running for mayor, governor, senator, or president) follow the narrative of a "wholesome, near flawless" candidate that will somehow save the day. It is actually a Marxist to believe a "superman" will save us all and solve all of our problems. The hypocrisy comes in when people demand a politician running for office be "near perfect," yet the same armchair critics can - with fervor - assert that "the government is corrupt, and the people in Congress are corrupt." Why, then, would you think someone who is at least open to his scandals (no matter how they came about) is unworthy of a political position when the masses "know all politicians are crooks." It screams hypocrisy. To me, I am rather dark - so Bruce Wayne/Batman and Anthony Wiener/Carlos Danger show me that humans aren't so perfect. But, if Wiener actually has resonating political talking points, I don't see why his peen pics matter politically.

Also, since America (and most of the Western world) is secular, a non-Christian president shouldn't be scoffed. I am not advocating it, but I am about complete freedoms [of speech.]
 
Upvote 0

Lollerskates

Junior Member
May 2, 2013
2,992
250
✟4,340.00
Faith
Non-Denom
You have obviously misunderstood me. I never suggested that someone who is keeping their Klan ties secret would never become suscessful in office, I was making the point that the public would not vote for someone if they knew they were members of the Klan. Which is why some of the examples you listed, as soon as their Klan ties became public, they were dismissed simply because of their ties with the Klan. There was a time in history when in some places you couldn't hold any kind of office unless you had the backing of the Klan. Now it has the opposite effect; Klan membership is a detriment.

K


O.K. we are probably making marginal ground.

Yes, of course the public would not accept a known KKK member. However, the public is rarely afforded good information. The claptrap comes from programming, and the real and scary stuff comes from experience. The KKK are more of sleeper agents, rather that, say, MS-13, Crypts, Bloods, Latin Kings, Aryan Brotherhood, etc. The KKK has been around for a long time; they have had time to hone their deception, and have learned how to reconnoiter their environment for maximum results. That is why I gave those quotes about public incredulity. In the end, the people that yell "conspiracy theorist" are the ones that years later will try to educate the conspiracy theorist. In the "crazy" circle, it was well known that the NSA was keeping diligent and meticulous logs on people's facebook, myspace, google Chrome, etc. Of course, three years ago, those who were talking about this stuff was "too heavy."

About the "now it is different" clause: this is the argument many on this thread aer trying to make. Racism has not really changed. The archetype is the same, and it has been bejeweled by clever legislative, economic, financial and judicial interactions and interpretations of the law.
 
Upvote 0

bhsmte

Newbie
Apr 26, 2013
52,761
11,796
✟247,431.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Wait for it....



Wait for it....




Wait for it....







We agree on something :). At least, I think we do.


Concerning your points, I have problems with American politics in regards to elections and "scandals." It is, I believe at least tangentially close to your points mentioned.

To me, the Anthony Wiener/Carlos Danger saga is ridiculous. Last time I checked, Wiener was a human; humans make mistakes and mess up most all of the time. What really get me sort of angry is how the general public will vilify Wiener's shenanigans so much so that he loses a race, or resigns hypocritically. It is an anthem that the "government is corrupt." Yet, the masses expect pristine-perfect candidates to choose from. It is especially contradictory when campaigns (whether running for mayor, governor, senator, or president) follow the narrative of a "wholesome, near flawless" candidate that will somehow save the day. It is actually a Marxist to believe a "superman" will save us all and solve all of our problems. The hypocrisy comes in when people demand a politician running for office be "near perfect," yet the same armchair critics can - with fervor - assert that "the government is corrupt, and the people in Congress are corrupt." Why, then, would you think someone who is at least open to his scandals (no matter how they came about) is unworthy of a political position when the masses "know all politicians are crooks." It screams hypocrisy. To me, I am rather dark - so Bruce Wayne/Batman and Anthony Wiener/Carlos Danger show me that humans aren't so perfect. But, if Wiener actually has resonating political talking points, I don't see why his peen pics matter politically.

Also, since America (and most of the Western world) is secular, a non-Christian president shouldn't be scoffed. I am not advocating it, but I am about complete freedoms [of speech.]

The United States, has the highest amount of people who claim to have religious ties (mostly christian) than any advanced nation in the world and by quite a bit. Now, I also believe that the actual true believers in the United States is a lot lower than the polls indicate, because in the United States, it isn't as accepted as it is in other advanced nations, to claim you are a non-believer and people just claim they believe out of habit and political correctness.

With that said, I don't believe the current culture in the United States would allow a non-believer to be elected president, no matter what their qualifications were, because the non-believer piece would be taken advantage of by who they were running against and they would be painted in a negative light and it would work.

In regards to Weiner, the dude made some stupid mistakes, but I would agree, a politician should be judged on their ability to uphold the office they are running for and not their personal life. Heck, look at Kennedy, the guy was addicted to sex and was likely hooked on pain killers as well, what do you think the chances are of him winning a presidential election today?
 
Upvote 0

Lollerskates

Junior Member
May 2, 2013
2,992
250
✟4,340.00
Faith
Non-Denom
The United States, has the highest amount of people who claim to have religious ties (mostly christian) than any advanced nation in the world and by quite a bit. Now, I also believe that the actual true believers in the United States is a lot lower than the polls indicate, because in the United States, it isn't as accepted as it is in other advanced nations, to claim you are a non-believer and people just claim they believe out of habit and political correctness.

With that said, I don't believe the current culture in the United States would allow a non-believer to be elected president, no matter what their qualifications were, because the non-believer piece would be taken advantage of by who they were running against and they would be painted in a negative light and it would work.

In regards to Weiner, the dude made some stupid mistakes, but I would agree, a politician should be judged on their ability to uphold the office they are running for and not their personal life. Heck, look at Kennedy, the guy was addicted to sex and was likely hooked on pain killers as well, what do you think the chances are of him winning a presidential election today?

.
 
Upvote 0

Notedstrangeperson

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2008
3,430
110
35
✟12,024.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
(Sorry about the long post.)

Lollerskates said:
I know this was part of the quote that got a very long response, but I don't think you can compare Jewish success to Black success in any fair way. Do you really think that a people that the States believes are the chosen people (Jews) of God are on an even playing field with the people that have been believed to be an inferior, beastly race good for nothing more than property to be bought, sold, bred and raped whenever (Blacks?)
I think you're underestimating the persecution Jewish people have faced, even in the US. For one, many of the extremist groups (usually far-Right wing white supremacists) which hate black people also hate Jews.

Additionally, Jewish people faced genocide in Europe - whereas in the US, even black slaves were not sentenced to die in the infamous ovens.

This isn't to say that black people haven't suffered greatly - obviously they have. The difference here is that, particularly in the USA, Jews and black people are on opposite ends of the social scale despite having faced threats and violence from the same type of extremist.

Lollerskates said:
And, if you are using a very vanilla example of situations people go through in other countries to somehow equate it to what blacks go through in the States...
Using examples from other nations and other ethnic groups is perfectly relevant. Indians (people from India, not native Americans) faced persecution and servitude from the British in their own country. Today India itself still has many problems, yet up to 70% of Indians in the USA have college degrees - a far higher percentage than the US population in general.

Similarly Jews have faced with religious and secular/ethnic persecution in Europe over the centuries, yet in terms of education and wealth, the Jews are a highly successful group.

Black peoplea are not the only group who have suffered from white colonialization and racism. I know that probably sounds harsh, and I'm not trying to downplay the effect such persecution has had - but if we are going to use racism and colonialization as an explanation, we would also have to explain why other races and enthic groups who have faced the same problem are more socially successful than black people.

Lollerskates said:
First of all, are you Black? Secondly, if you aren't Black, how could you possibly know what it is like to wake up in a country that, for example, thinks your entire race is so flawed that it is the anthropological duty of people who feel they are in a better situation to "fix" you, or at least dialogue on how Blacks can be helped? And, if you are Black, you need to really be Black - not "I'm 1/32 Black because my grandmother's cousin thrice removed was 1/4 Black" type of stuff. No Antebellum American "One-drop rule" Black. You need to look Black, so that you know what it is like to see people follow you in stores, so that your features can be the highlight of every primate-related ignorant joke. You need to have skin like a Black person, so you know what it is like to truly be profiled because of the color of your skin - not just suspicion, but being profiled to the point that you are denied service, access to public areas, harassed by cops, or even murdered. You need to know what it is like to wake up every day and have an anxiety and uncertainty about your life in the country of your residence that many White people in America have the luxury of not experiencing. If you aren't Black, or don't even look Black (with aforementioned features and such,) I respectfully ask that you don't comment on the "plight of the life of a Black person" ANYWHERE in the world - because you would be at a severe empathic, sympathetic, and intellectual disadvantage. You cant just throw out the same hackneyed and regurgitated statistics parroted on the media about "Black crack babies, drugs, and prisons," read a few Toni Morrison books, or Maya Angelou poetry, and figure "I understand black problems in America enough to where I can actually talk about how to 'help' them."
...
Again, are you Black? Did you have Black relatives who went through this time period? Were you alive 50 years ago, and Black?
Again, forgive me if I've misunderstood you, but it seems like you're insinuating that I can't have a valid opinion on black underachievement unless I'm black myself.

Because - if you were saying that the validity of my opinion is based on my race - well, that would be racist. ;)

To reiterate my point, black people have faced terrible persecution from white people over the last few centuries - but this is not unique to them. Other ethnics groups such as Indians and Jews have faced similar persecution from white people too, but today both of them actually outperform whites in terms of education and income. Black people (and Hispanics) however are underperforming.
 
Upvote 0

PassionFruit

I woke up like dis
May 18, 2007
3,755
313
In the valley of the wind
✟20,550.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
Using examples from other nations and other ethnic groups is perfectly relevant. Indians (people from India, not native Americans) faced persecution and servitude from the British in their own country. Today India itself still has many problems, yet up to 70% of Indians in the USA have college degrees - a far higher percentage than the US population in general.


I don't want to turn this discussion into "black or Hispanic" exceptional-ism, but I believe part of the reason why South Asians in general perform better because they come from families and those cultures tend to place higher value on education than American culture in general. Though the problem with these comparisons is they end up turning into something like "well this ethnic group is doing well, why this other ethnic group get their acts together?" I'm not accusing you of doing this by the way, but it's a very common tactic. That's how the "Model Minority" stereotype was created.


Black peoplea are not the only group who have suffered from white colonialization and racism. I know that probably sounds harsh, and I'm not trying to downplay the effect such persecution has had - but if we are going to use racism and colonialization as an explanation, we would also have to explain why other races and enthic groups who have faced the same problem are more socially successful than black people.

This statement is problematic because even though there other ethnic groups are socially and economically better off than blacks, they may not face the extreme persecution nowadays, but that doesn't mean they still don't face racism or discrimination.

Again, forgive me if I've misunderstood you, but it seems like you're insinuating that I can't have a valid opinion on black underachievement unless I'm black myself.

Because - if you were saying that the validity of my opinion is based on my race - well, that would be racist.


Well it's perfectly fine for you to have an opinion on the black community, but it's important to understand why that's the case first, a lot of well meaning white people jump into these discussions and get upset when they get accused of being racist and get defensive. If you don't want that to happen, it's important to understand why there's an achievement gap among blacks and Hispanics verses other groups. Most importantly, sometimes it's just better to sit back and listen. :)


To reiterate my point, black people have faced terrible persecution from white people over the last few centuries - but this is not unique to them. Other ethnics groups such as Indians and Jews have faced similar persecution from white people too, but today both of them actually outperform whites in terms of education and income. Black people (and Hispanics) however are underperforming.

I don't know quite about Jewish the experience so I won't comment on that. But I will address several theories as to why there's an achievement gap. One issue is I believe is due to the fact that some blacks and Hispanics live in economically disadvantage areas. With that, that means there will be bad schools and high crime rates. Most likely, if you group up in these types of neighborhoods, the chances of going to college and making it out are quite slim. Now with this school-to-prison pipepline taking place, that's going to have an impact on young black and Hispanic boys. Other ethnic groups don't have these same road blocks.
 
Upvote 0

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,790
✟225,690.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
You keep making empty statements. These people that were Klan members (secretively) had political power by definition.
I never said individual racists who kept their Klan ties secret had no political power, I was speaking about the organization.

Anybody cannot be racist - this is what people understand. Racism is a structure. It is quasi-tangible, because the institutions in which it resides. Prejudice is an abstraction - like feelings of hate. Saying "anybody can be racist" is ignorant of the superlative designation of the term.
Are you a lexicographer? I took the liberty of presenting a few on line definitions of the word “racism” (obviously a racist is a person who believes in racism)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Racism
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Racism?s=t

In post 118 I said “Racism is about believing one race is inferior or superior than another.” Now according to every source I can find, my definition is correct. If you can find a source that says racism has anything to do with power; or whatever it is you are trying to claim please present it. Otherwise it just looks like you are saying “trust me” and expecting us to take your word for it

Ken
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Ken-1122

Newbie
Jan 30, 2011
13,574
1,790
✟225,690.00
Faith
Atheist
Marital Status
Private
Well, what other ways can racism occur? You haven't responded to any of the many ways someone can be a racist - besides political power.
Yes I did! On post #118 I said “I racism is believing one race is inferior or superior to another”
Obviously the more power a person has the more damage he can do as a racist, but just because a person is not in a position to cause significant harm does not mean he does not have racist views.

Ken
 
Upvote 0

knw1991

Veteran
Oct 20, 2011
1,156
154
✟16,539.00
Faith
Marital Status
Single
As a black person I believe blacks have suffered disprportinately in areas that you all discussed because of one the oppression their ancestors faced and many times if you don't have ancestors who went to college they won't encourage you to do so, but you have some parents that will. But it's all a matter of will, you can come from a disadvantaged background and still go to college and be successful or some black youth don't know of opportunities like financial aid for college so they don't think going to college is an option. This is regarding black families in poverty or the lower working class. Also institutionalizred racism can be the cause, we really don't know how those in power feel about minority groups, some may fight to keep the wealthy wealthy and not be concerned about helping those in poverty of all races make it out. Also media influences like rap music has made some black young men think that success is about having money and women, but again everyone comes to the age to know right from wrong and they are responsible for their own decisions. Overall I think it's a combination of generational practices ( if parents didn't go to college or graduate high school they may not encourage or care if their kids do or not), the youth may feel like they can't achieve more than what their family has achieved so they limit themselves, media influences, and institutionalizred racism, and a lack of knowledge about health opportunities, educational opportunities etc either because they don't seek out this knowledge or it's purposely withheld. Another thing I noticed is that in the city I live in, where there is a majority of African Americans, many of the restaurants we have are fast food places with the exception of subway and Quiznos which is pretty much everywhere,but if I go to pembroke pines or boca raton, two diverse cities that have people with higher socioeconomic status, there are more healthy places to eat and there is a great variety of restaurants such as chipotle, panera bread, gyroville, a vitamin shoppe, a whole foods grocery store and more healthier options. Could this be why blacks seem to be at higher risk for heart disease and diabetes? I still believe in the responsibility of the individual to make good choices for themselves.
 
Upvote 0

Notedstrangeperson

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2008
3,430
110
35
✟12,024.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
PassionFruit said:
I don't want to turn this discussion into "black or Hispanic" exceptional-ism, but I believe part of the reason why South Asians in general perform better because they come from families and those cultures tend to place higher value on education than American culture in general.
You're probably right here. That's what the economist Roland Fryer thinks is behind the lack of success in both black and Hispanic Americans (link).

I also think this attitude towards eduction is why education among white people seems to be going downhill - and it would be pretty hard to blame that on racism. ;) Here in the UK the group who are doing the worst in terms of education are actually working-class white boys. That's partly because they simply don't need any degrees to do their jobs, and perhaps because they tend to come from poorer families, but I suspect it's also because they've become complacent in terms of education.

PassionFruit said:
One issue is I believe is due to the fact that some blacks and Hispanics live in economically disadvantage areas. With that, that means there will be bad schools and high crime rates. Most likely, if you group up in these types of neighborhoods, the chances of going to college and making it out are quite slim. Now with this school-to-prison pipepline taking place, that's going to have an impact on young black and Hispanic boys. Other ethnic groups don't have these same road blocks.
This is something of a chicken-and-egg question: are Jewish people successful because they live in good neighbourhoods and go to good schools, or can they afford to live in good neighbourhoods and go to good schools because they are successful?

Similarly, are black people unsuccessful because they have very few opportunities, or do they have very few opportunities because they are unsuccessful? Both, probably. It's a vicious cycle.
 
Upvote 0

Notedstrangeperson

Well-Known Member
Jul 3, 2008
3,430
110
35
✟12,024.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
In Relationship
(I'm not trying to cause an argument about who's worse-off here, this is simply a chart that caught my eye.)

2012-sdt-asian-americans-002.png

(Via pewsocialtrends)​

Hispanic Americans are actually less likely to have a degree that black Americans, yet on average Hispanic households earn $6,700 more than black households. Why is that?


A few other interesting stats I came across:
  • Roughly 14% of Native Americans have degrees - compared with 18% of black Americans - and the median income for a Native household is $33,132 (link).
    • This is slightly lower than the median income for black households but significantly lower that Hispanic households, who are even less likely to have any kind of degrees.
  • 77% of Native Americans have high schools diplomas (same link as above)...
  • Compared to 65% of Hispanic and black students (link).
For whatever reason, degrees among black people seem to have less earning power compared to other ethnic groups.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PassionFruit

I woke up like dis
May 18, 2007
3,755
313
In the valley of the wind
✟20,550.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
This is something of a chicken-and-egg question: are Jewish people successful because they live in good neighbourhoods and go to good schools, or can they afford to live in good neighbourhoods and go to good schools because they are successful?

Similarly, are black people unsuccessful because they have very few opportunities, or do they have very few opportunities because they are unsuccessful? Both, probably. It's a vicious cycle.


It could be, but there are blacks and Hispanics who have made it out of disadvantage areas. I can't specifically speak for Hispanics, but I know for Blacks Americans post segregation there was a sudden rise of the black middle class, those specific blacks were able to make it out and were moving into mostly white middle class neighborhoods (then that's where the discussion of white-flight comes into play). Hence today, there's some tension between lower income and middle class blacks. The sad part is even blacks and Hispanics get educated and make it into the middle class, there's still a large wealth disparity. I'm only pointing this out because it's also an socio-economic issue as well as racial.
 
Upvote 0

PassionFruit

I woke up like dis
May 18, 2007
3,755
313
In the valley of the wind
✟20,550.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
(I'm not trying to cause an argument about who's worse-off here, this is simply a chart that caught my eye.)

Oh no, not at all. Those stats are very important. People need to see it. In fact, I recently had a discussion with my fiancé who's Pakistani-American about this. He comes from a solidly middle class background. Though his parents both were educated. I also think that's why Asian Americans and South Asians tend to have more education, because when they immigrate here they're already educated.

Anywho, I'm a black American who's college educated and has a decent career, will be pursuing a graduate degree very soon. But knowing the statistics, sometimes I really do feel like it's all a waste. I'm not alone in these feelings either. I really worry about blacks who attended HBCU's because it's a dead give away. I also feel another reason why the economic gap is wide among the black community is because we don't keep our wealth inside the community. That's why I'm making it a goal to support black owned businesses. :)
 
Upvote 0

Lollerskates

Junior Member
May 2, 2013
2,992
250
✟4,340.00
Faith
Non-Denom
(Sorry about the long post.)


I think you're underestimating the persecution Jewish people have faced, even in the US. For one, many of the extremist groups (usually far-Right wing white supremacists) which hate black people also hate Jews.

Additionally, Jewish people faced genocide in Europe - whereas in the US, even black slaves were not sentenced to die in the infamous ovens.

This isn't to say that black people haven't suffered greatly - obviously they have. The difference here is that, particularly in the USA, Jews and black people are on opposite ends of the social scale despite having faced threats and violence from the same type of extremist.

I am actually underestimating the persecution of Black people, in comparison to Jewish people. Yes, the Holocaust happened. Yes, Jewish people faced genocide in Europe. Guess what: so did Africans and Black slaves. Where as the Holocaust happened, and a quantitative description of that atrocity could be forged, countless millions of Black slaves were murdered, tortured, raped (to death,) and flayed. No one counted this number, because Black slaves were property - that is another distinction between Jews and Blacks. Jews were at least called entities like dogs or swine. Black people were comparable to pieces of paper, or dung.

And, saying that extremist groups treat Black people the same as Jews is incorrect - it is like saying the homosexual persecution in the States is the same - or comparable to Black struggle. It is insulting and marginalizing, because for one thing you can always hide homosexuality AND your Jewish background. You cannot hide being Black. Secondly, the ignorance it takes to compare slavery, post-Antebellum American racism, Jim Crow, post civil rights, and millennial racism to Jewish and homosexual trials - in America - is simply monstrous.

Black people are a default for directing hate. Only someone who chooses to ignore that, or is not Black would not understand this. You cant even "be black for six months" like some people have tried to do anthropologically, because in the back of your mind, you know when the term is up you can go right back to being your original race. Black people are Black forever; the experiences of racism, and the experiences of having to hear people marginalize them and tell them to essentially "get over it" when injustices happen daily are ongoing and continual - until Black people die.


Using examples from other nations and other ethnic groups is perfectly relevant. Indians (people from India, not native Americans) faced persecution and servitude from the British in their own country. Today India itself still has many problems, yet up to 70% of Indians in the USA have college degrees - a far higher percentage than the US population in general.
So? Statistics can make anything look pretty, especially when you don't include the sample space. What about the Indians in their own country? And, are the British still occupying India as they did in the 19th century? Or, do the Indians in India have some sort of veneer of control of their country?

Black people can go to any other nation and prosper - especially if the nation accepts them. That is not the argument. The argument is racism in one's own country, by the people in power in one's own country.

Similarly Jews have faced with religious and secular/ethnic persecution in Europe over the centuries, yet in terms of education and wealth, the Jews are a highly successful group.
Ok. Does that still happen to this day? Or, is there a culture of Jews being default occupational success stories (almost stereotypically,) like being a lawyer, doctor, scientist, etc.? And, are the stereotypes of Black people "good ones," or the same hackneyed "chicken and watermelon, grape soda, big lipped, crack addict, murdering, smelly animal, criminal" stereotypes? Are you really trying to convince me that - even if Jews and Black people started at the same bottom - Jews are on an even playing field with Black people, especially in terms of persecution?

Black peoplea are not the only group who have suffered from white colonialization and racism. I know that probably sounds harsh, and I'm not trying to downplay the effect such persecution has had - but if we are going to use racism and colonialization as an explanation, we would also have to explain why other races and enthic groups who have faced the same problem are more socially successful than black people.
Who is saying black people are the only one's that suffered from white imperialism and racism?

And, "these ethnic groups" aren't "more successful" than another ethnic group. That is a statistician argument that is politically backed. The truth is that all ethnics groups are successful - you can't measure success over a whole ethnicity - and it would be both ignorant and arrogant to do so. And, you don't sound harsh saying something like this because it is trite; the mainstream media, racist politicians, average layperson, and internet trolls have already beat you to this several times over (not that I am calling you any of those.) Especially with educated Black people, things like this don't mean anything because we know the truth of the situation, and how ignorant it is to measure the success of an entire race, and to compare it to the success of another race. As said before, it is a statistician argument that is politically backed.


Again, forgive me if I've misunderstood you, but it seems like you're insinuating that I can't have a valid opinion on black underachievement unless I'm black myself.

Because - if you were saying that the validity of my opinion is based on my race - well, that would be racist. ;)
That is not what I am saying - why is the extreme always taken when I spend plenty of clicks on the keyboard trying to thoroughly explain my position?

I don't bash people for having an opinion on black underachievement if they aren't Black. Valid is a matter of opinion, of course. What I am saying is that you cannot possibly understand the intricacies of Black problems, and the thorough degradation, politics, and discrimination if you aren't Black yourself. Opine all you want. But, saying you understand the "plight of Black people" - so much so that you think your opinion of their underachievement is "valid," is ignorant at best. That is like me saying I understand the plight of North Korean women trying to escape from N.K. to Hong Kong in order to have a better life - because I experience racism and prejudice in the States. Really? Of course, I can opine about N.K. women's experiences, and their perceived underachievement all day long. The validity of such an opinion is debatable at best.

And, no saying the validity of your opinion is based on your race is not racist. Saying your opinion is valid is in and of itself a matter of opinion - especially if you are a different race. You think if you are Peruvian, and lived there all of your life, you could say that your opinion on cultural whitewashing of Hawaiian culture is valid - no questions asked? I would hope not; it would be a matter of opinion - on both accounts (both the opinion, and its validity.)


To reiterate my point, black people have faced terrible persecution from white people over the last few centuries - but this is not unique to them. Other ethnics groups such as Indians and Jews have faced similar persecution from white people too, but today both of them actually outperform whites in terms of education and income. Black people (and Hispanics) however are underperforming.
No one is arguing anyone else's persecution by white people. The title of the thread, and the subject of the original post is directed toward Black people in America. So, it would be germane if we kept on the subject of Black people in America, and the subject of the OP.

And, just so you know: you sound very ignorant when you compare the success of any race, especially when you don't live in the country. (Now, before you say I said your opinion doesn't matter, re-read what I wrote: I said you sound ignorant; I didn't say your opinion doesn't matter. If you gather that from reading what I said, those are your own feelings.)

Even if you did live in the States (for all of your life,) you would still have to know, and accept the political skew toward making brown people seem undesirable, and lighter skinned people more desirable. Like I said before, brown people's accomplishments are not paraded in the States - they are not subjects of discussion often.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Lollerskates

Junior Member
May 2, 2013
2,992
250
✟4,340.00
Faith
Non-Denom
I never said individual racists who kept their Klan ties secret had no political power, I was speaking about the organization.



You are still separating the person from the group - when the individual is distinctly part of the group. As I alluded to before, does one CIA agent's hit mean that it was his/her personal accomplishment - or is it the accomplishment of the entire CIA, especially when the orders come directly from the CIA?

If a Klansman is in political places of power, it isn't just the person's individual accomplishment: it is the accomplishment of the entire organization, because the entire organization can and will benefit from that one person's position. So, a score of individual racists who kept their Klan ties and have political power means that the Klan has multiple vectors for exploiting political power.


Are you a lexicographer? I took the liberty of presenting a few on line definitions of the word “racism” (obviously a racist is a person who believes in racism)
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Racism
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Racism?s=t

In post 118 I said “Racism is about believing one race is inferior or superior than another.” Now according to every source I can find, my definition is correct. If you can find a source that says racism has anything to do with power; or whatever it is you are trying to claim please present it. Otherwise it just looks like you are saying “trust me” and expecting us to take your word for it

Ken
Yes I did! On post #118 I said “I racism is believing one race is inferior or superior to another”
Obviously the more power a person has the more damage he can do as a racist, but just because a person is not in a position to cause significant harm does not mean he does not have racist views.

Ken

Ah, the "I'm not Webster, so what do I know" argument. Was I ever talking about the dictionary definition of racism, or have I continually spoken about the sociological definition of racism - and explicitly said it was the sociological definition?

The KKK is both racist in the most basic dictionary form of the word, and they are sociologically racist. I think it is a little disingenuous to use the KKK as a talking point on [non]racism because they have no "perceived" political power (when in fact, they actually do.) It is especially ignorant when someone responds like this, without understanding what you are responding to - or without actually reading/comprehending it. Sociological stipulations... that is plural: political power... that is [a] singular [stipulation]. Ho hum...


I'm not saying someone with an institutional title is the only way to be racist. I am saying those people are categorically racist if they use their power to substantiate their prejudice for other races. Sociologically, that makes you racist.

That is incorrect sociologically. If someone calls me a "**gger," they are not racist, because the sole act of them calling me a **gger does not affect my financial, legislative, economic or executive progress. Those people would be bigots, ignorant, or prejudiced.

This thread is not a discussion of the definition of racism. It is about the sociological implications racism has on "The black community." And, if you are saying racism is nothing more than what Webster says it is - which is "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" - then you exclude the lot of "armchair" bigots, and prejudiced people, which includes all races.

So, no more is calling someone a "creepy @SS cracker" racist, because saying something like that doesn't reflect someone's belief that their skin color is an inherent indicator of superiority over the "cracker." No more can you throw around the term "racism," and "reverse racism," until one has shown genuine distinction that s/he believes his/her race is a categorical indicator of superiority. With your definition, you don't get to yell racism just because your feelings are hurt (as many people do.) If you are calling someone racist because you assume they believe their race inherently holds superiority over another race (the one in question,) that makes you ignorant - because the information was never given to you (about superiority.) People like the KKK, as I have said, are both racist in terms of the dictionary definition, and sociologically racist. The KKK explicitly believes their race makes them fundamentally superior to other races. A black person calling a white person an ignorant name is not racism, unless there is clear proof and indication s/he is saying it in relation to expressing his/her belief in his/her race's superiority over the white person. This is, of course, if you exclude the sociological definition and implications of racism, which, ironically is just as ignorant as racism itself.

Racism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
American Sociological Association (This whole website would probably be of good use for you.)
Racism | SociologyFocus
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

PassionFruit

I woke up like dis
May 18, 2007
3,755
313
In the valley of the wind
✟20,550.00
Faith
Humanist
Marital Status
Engaged
Politics
US-Democrat
Are you a lexicographer? I took the liberty of presenting a few on line definitions of the word “racism” (obviously a racist is a person who believes in racism)

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/racism
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/Racism
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/Racism?s=t

In post 118 I said “Racism is about believing one race is inferior or superior than another.” Now according to every source I can find, my definition is correct. If you can find a source that says racism has anything to do with power; or whatever it is you are trying to claim please present it. Otherwise it just looks like you are saying “trust me” and expecting us to take your word for it

Ken

This bears repeating, but it's a shame that it must be repeated. As Lollerskates has repeatedly said to and I've pointed this out, racism is much deeper than believing one race is inferior to another race. There's a systematic aspect to it.
Surprisingly enough, Wikipedia has a decent definition of Institutionalized Racism.
Institutional racism - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Center for the Study of White American Culture
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0