Obviously, it is not as clear-cut as that.
This sounds very much like an opinion rather than a scientifically established fact.
Regards,
Shodan
The definitive answer: You tube clip of Chris Rock on black people vs niggaz
Yes…let’s be frank about race. First…I am for equality for everyone. Secondly…the affirmative action laws in the nation are discriminatory against white people and the racism that is now prevalent in the country is against the white majority. There is nothing wrong with giving everyone equality. There is no doubt that some racist laws aimed at blacks had to be changed. However,…now they are aimed at whites and have the full weight of the United States government behind them.
We have seen lately the attitudes and the bullying of some blacks that percieve they have the upper hand. There is a rash of black on white crimes that are racially motivated. They are not called ‘hate crimes’ by authorities because they are against white people and eveyone know whites really have not rights.
Whites have no redress in the courts so we will eventually have to get our equality back in the streets…and we will.
Well, they’re wrong, for a few reasons. First, they don’t say what a frank discussion about race is, or who’s supposed to have it, or what that even means. Second, a discussion about race is a short discussion. “People look different. 18th-19th century anthropologist divided people into different races based on their appearance. Those racial classifications were used as an excuse for racism.” There’s your discussion. If you want to have a discussion about racism, or attitudes that people have about different races, that’s another thing. But that’s a different discussion. Third, people talk about racism and racial attitudes already. We’re already having these discussions.
I realized that there are still people like Bullrun, but I never thought that they have the temerity to post their “inner KKK voice” on this board. Wow!!!
I suspect that the problems have multiple sources that have included explicit racism and institutional racism, along with failures of leadership in both the overall society and the black community.
Explicit racism would include the Republican Southern Strategy, Driving While Black, refusal to hire or promote people with “odd” names or sell or rent houses to them.
Institutional racism would include the idiotic drug laws that punish drugs popular among the black community much more harshly than eqivalent drugs outside the black community, (accompanied by funding such drug “wars” more heavily, ensuring that a greater percent of blacks will be imprisoned), and, even more insidious, the tendency of prosecutors and courts to treat all black crime more harshly than equivalent white crime, further ensuring that the criminal justice system acts as much to place burdens on the black community as it does to protect black citizens.
The failure of leadership occurred on two levels. I have memories of a number of black leaders in the 1970s (including Jesse Jackson) promoting bootstrap activities in black neighborhoods and encouraging personal responsibility among black youth. At the same time, he spent a certain amount of effort challenging “the Man” to do right by black communities, which gave him credibility with his audience. Then, it seems that the lure of fame, (by which Jackson was always tempted), lured him away from his in-group role promoting self-reliance and into the role of “society’s gadfly.” Al Sharpton also enjoyed the gadfly role. It is easy, of course, to blame Jackson and Sharpton for their “failures of leadership,” but the other side of that coin is that the news media championed them in those roles, (they made good theater). Black leaders who actually promoted self-reliance rarely got any exposure, so their audiences tended to be limited to the churches or community centers in which they worked and they were never given the sort of exposure that Jackson and Sharpton received that would have allowed them to get their message out to a broader audience.
White leadership was pretty much as bad, such as Reagan’s claim that when he was growing up, no one cared about race and that there were not any black leaders agitating for differences–conveniently ignoring that he grew up just a few miles from and a few years after the Springfield riot, and during the height of the KKK power in the North, that would have “encouraged” any small group of black people in his community to keep their heads down and their mouths shut.
Of course, when a prominent black person does speak up–as Bill Cosby has been doing in recent years–there is an immediate chorus of catcalls from a certain group within the white community that use his words as an excuse to claim “See, it’s all their own fault,” which does not really help Cosby get his message out and does nothing to encourage better relations among the groups.
One other aspect of the situation is that nearly all such discussions tend to focus on the major problems of the inner cities while ignoring the progress that has been made by the black community that has begun moving out into the suburbs, with all the middle class money and values that accompany those moves.
I think we’d both agree that false accusations of racism are counterproductive, and that accusations that a person is being hateful when he might be merely ignorant or curious are also counterproductive. I don’t think it follows from that that white people should stop caring about being called racists. Although avoiding actual racism is more important than picking the right name.
Yes. But I also think you made a statement that was overly broad, so I wasn’t surprised that someone else reacted the way Whack-A-Mole did.
To quote a wise fellow, what’s this “we” shit, paleface? And how did white people get to be disenfranchised when about 75 percent of Americans are white, and few other groups have gotten any kind of significant representation in government until the last couple of decades?
I’m interested in what you’re actually gonna do “in the streets” Bullrun?
What rights are you denied by virtue of being white out of interest?
Well, to be Frank…
There is no such thing as white people as a group. There are whites who are well represented in the halls of power, white people who are moving up the ladder, and white people who are screwed in our society through no fault of their own.
Part of a FDOR would hopefully be to dispel the grouping of individuals into overly simplistic groups. Asa poor, gay, white male friend of mine put it, “My white male dividend check didn’t arrive today, did yours?” Now, there will be those who will jump in talk about all of this amazing priveldge that I have for just being a white male - and IN GENERAL they have a small point. However, I would prefer that my daddy was Obama, or Powell, or better yet anyone from the wiki list of black billionaires.
In the Great Shark Hunt, Hunter S. Thompson mutters that Affirmative Action will work as long as poor white trash doesn’t realize that they are being screwed. Well, poor white trash has woken up, and that has helped cause some of the modern strife.
Actually, black on white crime is routinely recorded as hate crime, so you are immediately wrong in your presentation. There is ample evidence that blacks continue to be trreated more harshly in court than whites, (and as blacks make up a diminishing minorty of the U.S. population, they are hardly imposing any serious harm on the white population).
As to Affirmative Action being “discriminatory” against whites, it hardly has an impact except as a rallying cry for people who really never study the situation. (The greatest beneficiaries of AA have tended to be women, regardless of race, and not any ethnic group.) The Supreme Court has been paring back AA laws since Bakke in in 1978 and there is very little actual law or actual effect in what law remains. “Everyone” has a story aqbout how they know someone who was “harmed” by AA laws, but most of those stories turn out to be bad decisions by local groups that had no basis in law and many, if not most of them, have been overturned when they have gone to court.
Basically, it is the old story that the poorest people have to struggle the hardest to survive, so they tend to pick “enemies” from among people who are most nearly (perceived to be) in direct competition and then use a few anecdotes to support their beliefs without ever trying to discover the facts. (Don’t worry, black people do it too.)
It is very hard to make these sorts of arguments without either triviality or tautology. If you argue that because there is a high crime rate that there is a “culture of crime,” then you’re just equating the two things and and are not making any positive claims. If you argue that that subgroups have a higher crime rate because they have a culture of crime, then your argument is circular. I agree with Hentor that this attribution is typically racist. Although the first proposition is logically trivial, it tends to turn what should be a strictly empirical debate into something very normative.
Very true, and yes, that does get neglected in discussions about race and about poverty. I’m sure I’ve made that mistake before. But then again black people aren’t homogeneous either. And the point here is that bullrun is treating white people as a homogeneous group as well - and making some pretty bold statements about what white people are doing in response to a fictional social disadvantage.
I was ignoring **bullrun **admittedly.
While I think that the impact of slavery has a measurable negative impact on ALL blacks (some certainly more than others), the power of being the dominant race in America does not have a positive impact on all whites.
I’d agree with that, too. Or I would at least I’d agree that any advantage can be easily canceled out by other factors.
no…it is not unsolved.
It was unresolved, but now it’s taken care of. Goodnight everybody! Drive safe! 
Funny…but when minorities march in the streets and burn buildings…it is ok. They are protesting. When whites even threaten it…we are the Klan etc. We don’t have any right (in the eyes of libs and minorities) to do what they do to call attention to our plight. The double standard will end.
What plight? And which people are defending rioting? So far you’re offering nothing but broad, unsupported generalities.
WE do not need EVERYONE. If you want to sit it out…do it.
Who is “we,” and what am I sitting out? You could be a lot more specific, although I’d rather you answer my other questions first.