ajax18 wrote:How much coverage do Al Sharpton's and Jesse Jackson's statements get in the New York Times, not the mild ones, I mean the really racially divisive ones that aren't even true to start with.
Such as what? What "really racially divisive" statements from Sharpton and Jackson are you referring to? (Especially if, as you claim, they do not receive wide media coverage?)
Do you feel that racism towards Blacks is or ought to be on equal footing---morally and ethically speaking---as racism towards members of the white majority?
Yes, because I think we need to stop trying to get vengeance on each other for the past and put it behind us.
That doesn't really answer my question.... It glosses over all sorts of complexities and contexts to the extent that the statement is, in effect, a red herring. On the other hand, I see how your statement could be read as a tacit admission on your part that, yes, in fact, Blacks in the U.S. have had to endure much, much more suffering and racism, and that it is sort of silly for white Americans to cry foul.
Let God sort it out in the next life. The quicker we stop talking about it and take on a truly color blind policy, the more likely it is to go away.
I don't follow your logic here.... I.e., it's as if you're saying, "If we all agree to pretend there's no problem, then there won't be any problem!" Seems a pretty gross oversimplification, imho.
If you think you're going to brow beat me into conceding that I owe minorities something because I'm a white man than we'll always be at war.
I don't think anyone said anything about whites "owing" something to minorities.... I think the discussion at hand has to do with what "racism" means...
It's very biological. That doesn't make it right, but it is something we're born with. I respect you're history and wordsmith abilities. Respect my understanding of biochemistry. Preserving your own genes is the strongest desire we have. This includes insuring the well being of those who share more genes with you than others.
Wow, Ajax, this is getting pretty far out there.... Now you are trying to apply Social Darwinism in order to justify racist thought and behavior? I.e., you are claiming that feelings of racial superiority---or solidarity?---are
biological???
Ajax---what are you talking about? What "side of the story"? That they did not have to endure racism? What are you talking about? What "unwanted barrage of leftist propaganda"? Are you sure that you haven't bought into a right-wing conspiracy story about how non-whites are going to "take over the country"?
A lot of black leaders and some cooky white people I've heard on the news claim there is no such thing.
"No such thing as what"? A right-wing conspiracy? Racism? What?
Do you agree with them or not? You didn't answer my question.
I don't know, my friend. I don't understand what you're referring to.
Truthfully I don't mind so much when blacks, latinos etc. favor their own kind. I sort of respect the brotherhood and tribal loyalty. That's who they are and I don't think they even want to change that. I don't really blame them. I just think I should be allowed to do the same if that's what they're going to do.
I don't think anyone would object to that.
It's just a shame that I belong to a race that doesn't seem to value these things. So yes I would love to have someone watch my back the way minorities do for each other. To a lesser extent, I've found that in Mormonism.
Well, being a member of a minority group often does result in these sort of "tribalistic" solidarities. Part of the reason for this is that minorities often have to endure various kinds of suffering at the hands of the majority, hegemonic group---suffering such as racism.
Ok Scratch, you asked for documentation. Now go ahead and tell me this stuff didn't happen. It seems to correlate with my experiences as a pizza driver when a fellow worker got the piss beat out of him by three black guys on delivery. It amazed me that while he had $200 on him, all they took was the pizza. He was out of work for a month and had some permanent scarring. He was unconscious for some time after the attack. Guess what happened to these three black men for what they did? Basically nothing of course, community service.
Not sure what your point is. Would you care to elaborate? I.e., do you believe that the men were given a lighter sentence on account of their race? Or are you saying that you believed they acted violently due to their race? In either case, what is the basis for your belief in either of these premises (provided, of course, that you believe either of these premises is true...)
Luckily I've been blessed with large stature and haven't been personally robbed yet. I guess they figure it's not worth the backlash I could offer if they were to prey on me. They'd probably have to shoot me dead and that's not always as easy to get away with, but that too does happen. I've seen them gang up on smaller friends like a pack of wild dogs.
I have seen white people do this too. In fact, I have seen white people doing this under the aegis of institutional authority... Again, what 's your point?
You asked for an example. Here it is. Now go ahead and tell me this stuff never happened.
Kayla Rolland,
six-year old
White victim of integration.
Dedrick Owens, snarled, “I hate
you,” before
shooting Kayla.
The murder of six-year-old Kayla Rolland, a White little girl, by a Black student, Dedrick Owens, highlights the damage that forced racial integration has done to European Americans. Sheriff Robert Pickell said Owens’ father told him that Dedrick fought with the other children because “he hated them.” Kayla Rolland’s violent death is just one example of thousands of White children who have suffered from criminal violence at the hands of minorities in public schools across America. It cries out for an honest discussion of racial integration’s incalculable damage to European Americans.
Six-year old, Jake Robel, killed by black carjacker.
The news media have made concerted efforts to hide the interracial aspect of the slaying of Kayla Rolland. None of the national news agencies reported that the victim was White and the perpetrator was Black. Contrast that with the media coverage of the acquittal of four police officers in New York. Even though there was no evidence of racial animus and although the jury
Ronald Taylor,
White hater.
included four Blacks, many headlines read, “Four White Officers Acquitted in Death of Black Immigrant.” Compare that headline with the coverage of the dragging death of a White, six-year-old little boy, Jake Robel, by a Black carjacker in Kansas City. The headlines in the Robel murder did not read, “Black carjacker drags White Child to His Death.” The media carefully avoided any mention of the fact that the killer was Black and the victim was White. The double standard finds ample illustration in the news coverage of a recent murderous rampage in Wilkinsburg, PA. The Black killer said that he would only shoot White people and called his victims “White racist pigs.” Many articles one the did not even identify the race of the shooter or include his anti-White statements as he shot 5 White people. If it would have been a White killer of Blacks, the headlines would certainly have read something like, “White Racist Murders Three Blacks — Wounds Two.”
Ajax---you're killing me here, man. First: sources? I'd like to see where you're getting this stuff. Second, in the case of the Kayla Rolland issue---why on earth do you (or your source) think that this is somehow attributable to "forced integration"? This is wack, far-out-there white supremist stuff, Ajax. You will want to avoid that kind of crap like it's the plague.