What types of externalities invalidate the claim of "peaceful" in the context of method of protest?

[RDKirk]

It's been going on for longer than that, especially since WWII with it's large inflow of blacks wanting work in war industries. I can't seem to avoid mentioning that your point about racial tension between blacks and Latinos is one made by CRT.

The general condition is what it is. It's the interpretation of the condition and particularly proposal for a solution that is infeasible in CRT.

 

[RDKirk]

I think Obama being president sort of "masked" certain disgruntlements in certain communities that would've come to the forefront much earlier had the democratic president during that tenure been another old white guy.

<snip>

And there was an interesting piece written by John McWhorter (and I'll see if I can dig it up again), but he elaborated on how democrats making a huge fuss over making sure illegal immigrants get certain accommodations/considerations starting around 2010-2012 was a slap in the face to a lot of impoverished black communities (and other minority communities who are actual citizens) who've been wanting those things from Democrats for decades and gotten nothing more that lip service, but it wasn't quite as "noticed", because people were happy with the milestone of having a president who was a person of color.

Some of the things he cited was the fact that it's long been a grievance in the Black and (legal) Latino communities that they're disproportionately more likely to serve time for non-violent offenses which leads to families getting separated. And apart from some rhetoric, not a lot was done.

Yet, when it was happening to undocumented people at the border, a bunch of Democrats raced down there to cry out in front of the detention facility for a photo-op.

Democratic governors signing bills to give education and healthcare to undocumented people
Democratic mayors offering to make their cities "sanctuaries" to help undocumented people avoid apprehension, and putting them up in $400/night hotel rooms to boot.

McWhorter asserted in the piece that things like that explain some of the "surprising" increases Trump saw among certain minority voters (but that it wasn't actually so "surprising" when you consider the backdrop and different variables at play between the Obama presidency and the Trump presidency)

I believe how McWhorter worded it in a televised interview was that "People were still drunk on the Hope & Change elixir when it was happening during Obama's tenure, and didn't get the hangover until Trump's tenure"

It wasn't until Obama's tenure had completed that black people saw with certainty that nothing was going to be done for us. That was the "Wait...what?" moment.

You will find among many blacks, and young black men in particular, a strong realization that Obama had not done as much as he could for black people in general and black men in particular.

But as I've mentioned before, that's because Obama was and is a full disciple of Critical Theory. As applied to the US, Critical Theory makes villains out of men in general and black men only slightly less so. Put another way, white heterosexual men are the Big Boss villain and black heterosexual men are only at best his henchmen.

 

[RDKirk]

As for black American sentiment, I did not know that the majority support maintaining the number of immigrants we have in the country via tighter border controls. Given all the resentments you note, youd think they might be for trying to reduce the number of resident immigrants.

You misunderstood the sentence. The meaning of the sentence is that the majority of black people favor tighter border controls as a means of managing the flow of immigrants into the country.

 

[durangodawood]

You misunderstood the sentence. The meaning of the sentence is that the majority of black people favor tighter border controls as a means of managing the flow of immigrants into the country.

I just re read it three times. I did not misunderstand the meaning of the sentence. It's possible the writer did tho.

 

[RDKirk]

I just re read it three times. I did not misunderstand the meaning of the sentence. It's possible the writer did tho.

You did not use context to understand the meaning, however, and with consideration that ThatRobGuy is not a boob.

 

[durangodawood]

You did not use context to understand the meaning, however, and with consideration that ThatRobGuy is not a boob.

I disagree. Not about Rob. But that the sentence as written contradicts anything else in Robs entire post that I quoted from. I re read that too.

 

[BCP1928]

<snip>

It wasn't until Obama's tenure had completed that black people saw with certainty that nothing was going to be done for us. That was the "Wait...what?" moment.

You will find among many blacks, and young black men in particular, a strong realization that Obama had not done as much as he could for black people in general and black men in particular.

But as I've mentioned before, that's because Obama was and is a full disciple of Critical Theory. As applied to the US, Critical Theory makes villains out of men in general and black men only slightly less so. Put another way, white heterosexual men are the Big Boss villain and black heterosexual men are only at best his henchmen.

OK, but that was then and this is now and we still have the same problem. The culture of human work and life is changing. Men, particularly working class men of all colors, are having a hard time adapting to it and they are getting a confused response from those who are supposed to be their fellow human beings. Some become reactionary and are the perfect foil for CRT and its hostile dualisms. But they are never going to roll back the clock to breadwinner husband and trad-wife. The other part of this is work and how it's changing, how we value it and those who do it. That's a long story but the bottom line is that the working person of color (of any color) will not be better off under the Trump administration than they were under the Obama administration.

 

[Bradskii]

I'm perfectly willing to pay more for stuff if it means having better control over our borders and who gets in.

Well, personally speaking, the price doesn't concern me at all. I just don't want people who are working hard at minimum wages at a job that most people wouldn't contemplate, trying to keep a family together, being randomly detained and sent off to a country they left many years ago.

But that's just me.

 

[Bradskii]

Are you suggesting I wouldn’t have that information or doubting its accuracy?

Your post speaks for itself. I shouldn't have to explain anything to you.