“I want to tell you one more thing I know about the Negro. When I go through North Las Vegas and I would see these little government houses, and in front of that government house, the door was usually open and the older people and the kid, and there’s always at least half a dozen people sitting on the porch, the didn’t have nothing to do. They didn’t have nothing for their kids to do. They didn’t have nothing for their young girls to do. And because they were basically on government subsidy, so now what do they do? They abort their young children, they put their young men in jail, because they never learned how to pick cotton. And I’ve often wondered, are they better off as slaves, picking cotton and having a family life and doing things, or are they better off under government subsidy? They didn’t get no more freedom. They got less freedom. They had less family life, and their happiness, you can see in their faces they weren’t happy setting on that concrete sidewalk.”
I’m not here to defend this guy, and I don’t like him or his hypocritical stance for a variety of reasons but his remarks lack a critical element: HOSTILITY or HATE.
Again, the remarks were stupid and ignorant and offensive but shouldn’t be construed as ‘racist’ without overt hostility or hate. He seems to be saying that our welfare system has not helped the African-American work ethic. This may be a factually inaccurate, but doesn’t strike me as hostile or hateful.
This thread is a call to reduce the amount of ‘racism-shaming,’ and to tighten and define properly what it means to be racist. The term is too promiscuously used. I’m against that. I Pit that, over some BBQ.
I strongly disagree that racism requires hostility or hate. It only requires that you regard “all” members of an ethnic group as behaving or being a certain way due to that ethnicity, and it helps if you regard yourself as superior to them on that basis.
Lots of racist southerners used to (maybe some still do) regard black people as simple as children, who have to be taken care of (and who therefore shouldn’t have the vote). Often hate is not evident when people express these attitudes (viz. Paula Deen). Doesn’t make them any less racist than the KKK with a noose and burning cross.
“Look at all those X people, all they do is lay around and take the government handouts. Maybe they would be happier if we forced them to work.” The first sentence is racist if X is an ethnicity. The second sentence borders on fascism.
Hey speaking of racists-in-the-news - turns out that Frazier Cross, the former KKK Wizzard and current anti-semitic murderer, was once busted for having sex with a black transvestite prostitute. You’re all shocked, I’m sure. I know I was.
OP…white Europeans, especially landless ones which were the majority in Europe were slaves in all but name. Why wouldn’t they have been better in that state as, of course, all of their needs were met?
It was extremely offensive and hilariously funny because it lost Bundy a great deal of desperately needed support. Hopefully, he’ll continue to spew his noxious rantings out and he will become an object of ridicule and scorn just before the BLM and the IRS place liens on his property and drive him into bankruptcy.
There are times when evidence is used to support a conclusion, and times when conclusions are obtained after looking at the evidence.
This is more of the former, he started with the conclusion then found the evidence he wanted to justify it. He wants to believe blacks are lazy and stupid, so he finds evidence of this by looking for it. I’ve worked with a variety of black people who are perfectly talented and educated. Most of us aren’t going around looking for the most dysfunctional 20% of blacks and ascribing those traits to all of them. I seriously doubt Cliven Bundy looks at all the middle class blacks who are doing fine, that doesn’t support his conclusion.
Also to hear Bundy who has fed his cows for free on federal land criticize those who get government subsidies is absurd. It is like those elderly people on medicare and social security after earning 25k a year for their whole lives (not nearly enough to pay into the system what they take out of it) complaining about the takers on welfare.
You’ve been here for 17 months. You have 47 posts.
But…You have started 21 threads, many of which (in my opinion) are slanted towards discussing/contesting news stories about minorities. Not all, but many. I also vote troll. Not a classic troll. But you’re not looking for belonging to a community. You’re looking to promote your agenda.
Many of your threads --I don’t understand your motivation.
Turns out there was more to his comments that didn’t make the news. This site has a more complete record of comments made before and after the comment quoted in the OP. I don’t have an opinion, and I don’t hang out in the pit, but offer the complete remarks for enlightenment.
Well, enlightenment is something this Bundy dude needs. Quite nice that he really likes “the Spanish people”, though running any sort of ranch or farm in the Southwest without a whole lot of them to provide the labor would be nigh impossible so of course he’s more familiar with them. But he’s still out in WTF-land with his positions on “the Negro”… wondering if a population group could have been better off in chattel bondage than in mere poverty? Yep, makes you looney fringe. And someone can be racist yet not be universally disparaging to ALL groups, or favorable exclusively to his own.
(Damn, tell me there’s footage of him talking about “the Jew”…)
And yes, he talks about the damaging effects of “subsidies”, for some reason preferring not to use the term “welfare” – yet many ostensibly conservative farmers/ranchers have no trouble accepting subsidies – and his original problem is that he believes profiting from grazing in open public land is some sort of “natural right” on which the Federal Government has no authority to assess any sort of user fee.
What happens if someone else wants to graze on the same open public space? Old-timey range war?
Why are we treating the poster with anything but contempt? His last post was a stupid riff defending a racist site and arguing that Jews control NYC. He’s a putz. A schmuck. A schlemiel. My cats have more brains. And, given that both are impressive mousers, far more usefulness. Go away, OP. You suck. Slavery is a vile and disgusting stain on American history. There is no defense for it.
Put another way, I’m just saying that stupidity and ignorance can be fought with more speech, education, and conversation but we should limit the use that term ‘racist’ to those who are truly hostile and hateful. This is just an opinion. “Racism” has simply become too expansive, the price paid is speech and ideas, and sometimes truth.