U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 03-28-2011, 06:48 PM
 
1,248 posts, read 1,840,359 times
Reputation: 1238

Advertisements

Wow, such a cognitive dissonance. It is as though you push this fantastical version of the world where there is no racism and everyone, yourself included, is tolerant, enlightened and dignifying of everyone regardless of skin color or ethnicity; then, often in the same post, you argue for a twist of Charles White, George Fitzhugh, and David Dukes. You say black people are not inferior and then spend a page "arguing" how they are.

You say you are against racism and that it is a non-factor in society now, yet you complain about basic civil rights legislation, you admit to using skin color against people in the workplace, spew out paleo-conservative libertarian pro-segregation and pro-discrimination apologia, deny lynchings and other private, individual and/or commercial racist acts with asinine and mendacious statements like "racism can only be perpetuated by government, so to believe that it takes government to stop racism, seems to me to be completely backwards "[hint: it wasn't the masses or private business who cracked down on Jim Crow, racist violence, lynching, intimidation and civil rights violations], etc., etc...

You say black people deserve discrimination because they are intellectually inferior unlike Asian-Americans who have proved their salt and now do not experience discrimination. Firstly, Asian-Americans do face discrimination. As do Iranian-Americans, despite the fact that they are the most educated ethnic group in the country. Intellectual achievement among the giants of a group does not ensure the elimination of discrimination nor would the hypothetical lack of them justify your preference for discrimination. Look up the story of Alexander Crummell. If you are truly honest, then you will see how allowing businesses and employers to discriminate based on skin color is degrading, violating, immoral and denies the dignity of another human being. In the case of Crummell, a genius beyond compare. Be honest, why do you see racial discrimination as this necessary evil? Why do you think science "proves" that blacks are lesser? Have you ever read the history of science and the hoaxes behind "scientific racism?" Have you ever read Stephen Jay Gould?

You say a minority with a degree is worthless to you. The fact you would degrade someone to nothingness shows callousness to an endless degree, but your un-adduced claim of intellectual shortfallings of African Americans or that there is this innate inferiority in terms of intelligence or dexterity compared to white people.

Well, there are millions of everyday African Americans who are educated, engaged in their community and helping this country grow. It is so disturbing you cannot see this, yet you think they are unworthy of working with or for you. You say they are worthless. Oh and historically some of the giants in their field have been African American.

I hate to imagine a world without W.E.B. DuBois, Frederick Douglass, Benjamin Banneker,D.H. Williams, P.L. Julian, George Washington Carver, Booker T. Washington, Alain Locke, Langston Hughes, Zora Neal Hurston, Paul Roebeson, Jean Toomer, Duke Ellington, Dr. Charles Drew, James West, Ralph J. Bunche, Fats Domino, Andrew Young, Benjamin Davis, Richard Wright, Gwendolyn Brooks, Thurgood Marshall, Sidney Poitier, Jimi Hendrix, Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X, Bayard Rustin, John Coltrane, Herman Branson, J.P. Cobb, Isaac Hayes, Henry Ransom Cecil McBay, Cornell West, H.L. Gates and Toni Morrison among hundreds more. I dare you to read of any of these people and not be impressed by their story and achievements. I dare you to say that they had an advantage over their white counterparts and simply coasted and inflated their way to prominence.


For someone who babbles on a bunch of nonsense about intelligence and knowledge, you have none about African Americans, American history or the societal scourge of racism. What's your SAT score, smart guy? What is your IQ?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 03-28-2011, 06:59 PM
 
Location: The Republic of Texas
61,068 posts, read 30,951,443 times
Reputation: 13015
Quote:
Originally Posted by poletop1 View Post


For someone who babbles on a bunch of nonsense about intelligence and knowledge, you have none about African Americans, American history or the societal scourge of racism. What's your SAT score, smart guy? What is your IQ?


I do no one thing.

There is no such thing as African-Americans, or any XX-Americans.

We are all Americans and nothing else.

Placing a label on any one group, enables those in power, to create a crisis between the labels, and divide them when they need to.

We are all Americans.
I have only heard one person stand up and say, "I'm not an African American. I'm an American."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-29-2011, 11:51 AM
 
Location: West Coast of Europe
19,865 posts, read 18,391,899 times
Reputation: 7965
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz View Post
People are going to be racists regardless. If you think racism is dead, you are sadly mistaken. Most people in one way or another are racist. Most people I have met who claim they aren't racist, would never date anyone of any other race. The vast majority of them have basically no real friends of another race, outside of that black guy they work with. And if you want to see real segregation, walk into a church.

As for the problem with racism back then was directly related to laws that forced segregation. They were laws that prevented miscegenation. They were laws that forced blacks to the back of the bus. If you actually look at the history surrounding these issues you might realize that, the majority of the people were actually against these laws. And in the case of anti-miscegenation laws, the only reason they even existed was because miscegenation was happening and people passed laws to stop it.

Without government intervention, it was only a matter of time before the people who were already intermarrying. And for the businesses that catered to both blacks and whites for economic gain. To eventually break down the racial divide. And the reason these laws were passed to begin with, was because some influential people wanted to keep that wall in place.

It is true that removing the laws would not have eliminated racism. But racism has not been eliminated by passing laws either. If you think forcing busing helped to eliminate racism, you are a fool. The insane amount of violence and hatred that spawned from the force busing situation created a whole new generation of racist. Who picked up and moved into the suburbs and rural areas of the country.


You cannot take someone who has been racist all their lives and just tell them one day that racism is bad. And if they continue to be racist, you will place them in prison, or take away their possessions. What you can do is let people interact with each other voluntarily for their mutual benefit. And that will create a mutual respect for one another.



I am.



Well, socialism is usually dysgenic in nature. While liberty usually produces what amounts to anti-dysgenics(I dare not say Eugenics).

Population Cycle Drives Human History - from a Eugenic Phase into a Dysgenic Phase and Eventual Collapse, The | Journal of Social, Political, and Economic Studies, The | Find Articles at BNET

This is easily seen in America and all over the world. The wealthy and productive have far less children than the poor and less productive. Without socialism, this could not and would not occur.

I am not saying in free societies that people of low IQ won't have any children, but they generally have LESS children. And generally the people of the lowest IQ's only end up with other people of very low IQ's, rather than dilluting the upper-end of the population.

Life is not a MENSA club application because life is easy. If life was harder, people would be much more careful about who they "get with". But if people were more careful about who they got with already, life could actually be easier than it already is.

Did you know, around 1/5th of the population in this country has some form of disability, and about half of those don't work at all.
I don't agree. I believe in humans' capability to change and learn.

I was going back way further than busing. I was talking about the moment blacks were taken to what is now the US. Back then it was not government that established racism. People already were, thus they traded in blacks as if they were things. There is also a religious side to that.

Sure busing is not perfect, but the intentions were good. The main problem was not solved though, i.e. the economic differences and all that comes with them.

Racists won't interact with other races voluntarily. Sometimes they need to be pushed a bit.



I don't like social-Darwinism, it is simply a euphemism for egoistic people disliking other people. Accordingly social-Darwinists are usually those people who benefit from a situation rather than those who suffer from it.



It is not so much about intelligence as it is about education. One doesn't have to be intelligent to lead a decent life and raise a family. Doctors etc. do indeed have fewer kids, but not because they are more intelligent, but because they are more educated, which leads to a completely different lifestyle. Educated people tend to get married much later, if ever. Especially educated women want to determine their own lives and not have their careers ruined by babies.
But they still do have children when the circumstances are right. France for instance provides child care etc. at a very high level, thus French women have more children on average than German ones.

Life is not simple. At least most people's lives are not simple. Lucky you if yours is.

What do you mean by the statment on disabled people? Being disabled has nothing to do with race. Check this site for a breakdown of the disabled in the US. The term comprises all kinds of conditions.
Disabled In Action: Facts About Disability in the U.S. Population
The data is from 2002, but probably hasn't changed much.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 01:23 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
7,192 posts, read 4,349,282 times
Reputation: 2647
Quote:
Originally Posted by poletop1 View Post
Wow, such a cognitive dissonance. It is as though you push this fantastical version of the world where there is no racism and everyone, yourself included, is tolerant, enlightened and dignifying of everyone regardless of skin color or ethnicity; then, often in the same post, you argue for a twist of Charles White, George Fitzhugh, and David Dukes. You say black people are not inferior and then spend a page "arguing" how they are.
I understand that I come across that way, but I think you misinterpret what I'm trying to express.

I am not an idealist, I am a realist. And while I understand that race is so far from absolute to be basically meaningless, there are certain issues with race that cannot be ignored.

Imagine if the only important factor of life was height, and employers only hired people of above-average height. Now, if we look at the four primary racial groupings of the world, you have whites, Asians, Africans, and Native-Americans. If employers only hired people who were above-average height, there would be a huge discrepancy in hiring between whites/blacks and Asians/native-Americans. In fact, most employment would probably be 3/4ths white/black and 1/4th asian/native-americans(or worse).

If you didn't understand or refused to recognize the racial differences, you might be led to believe that the only reason there is such a high percentage of employees in a company of white/black descent rather than Asian/native-american descent is because of racism, while ignoring the fact that height is a primary determinant for hiring. And so you might institute a policy where every employer must be "fair" in hiring(without really understanding what fair is), so any employer that doesn't hire a roughly equal amount of people of each racial background could be sued for large sums of money.

What that effectively does is, it forces companies to hire people who don't have the qualifications or talents they require(height). So it makes the workforce less capable. On top of that, a 6'2" black guy might not have been hired, while a 5'6" asian guy was hired on instead, which creates resentment by the black guy towards the asian guy. Who he feels like the only reason he didn't get hired was because of an unfair system designed to appease Asians.

And while people may not care that the black/white group has basically lost out because they are already much better off than the asian/native-american group to begin with. And that the Asian/native-american deserves a hand up to bring about a level of equality with the blacks/whites. The problem is, that does very little to satisfy the whites/blacks who are unfairly penalized because of such an unfair system.


Now, I understand that height is not the only attribute that matters in our society, and that in such a situation as I portrayed, height itself would be easy to recognize through observation, so it would be simple to see if bias existed or not. I used height because I think most people know that whites and blacks tend to be taller than asians and native-americans, and that is simply a fact. But that doesn't mean all whites and blacks are taller than all asians and native-americans. I know quite a few asians who are taller than I am(and I'm 6'2").

The problem with racism is basically like this. Since people know that asians are generally short. And if height was the only attribute that mattered, then if you were looking at a resume which asked for ethnicity, and they replied Asian, then you would instantly assume they were short, and thusly would be unqualified for a position. Which might be true most of the time, but because it isn't true all the time, you are making a generalization or an assumption, and you are not judging someone as an individual but only as a group, which is unfair and racist. But because this opinion and stereotype becomes so pervasive, it can become basically engrained in our culture and nearly impossible to overcome.


But yes, I probably shouldn't use height as an example, because it is so easy to recognize a persons height by simply looking at that person. On the other hand there are certain attributes that are nearly impossible to gauge, or to tell with any amount of certainty.

If you were to take the above scenario and replace height with intelligence, and if you swapped the position of blacks and asians. You would see the sort of foundation for racism in employment that has tended to exist in the past, and even to this day.

So how do we overcome it? Well that is a difficult cure to prescribe a remedy for.

The reason why we can't prescribe a cure for the black/white gap in private-employment is much the reason why we can't prescribe a cure for the black/white gap in employment in professional basketball or football. We may have to realize that the gap itself might be impossible to close. Not because of social or cultural reasons, but because of biological reasons.

But because of the competitive nature of professional sports, almost no one will make a statement like blacks are only the running back because of racism, or that blacks are only the cornerback because of racism, or even that whites are only the quarterback because of racism. They say, they play this position because they are the best player on the field.

What I would like to do is create a system where race doesn't matter, and people are hired based on ability or merit, and people don't sit around saying how a company hires too many whites or too many blacks based on some fixed percentage of the workforce based some arbitrary numbers. I want people to say, he has that job because he was the best person for the job. Under that system is the only way to true fairness, and it is only under such a system that racism can be destroyed.

And back to height for a moment, everyone can understand that "on average" whites and blacks are taller than asians and native-americans. And there are thousands of other physical characteristics that differentiate the "races" of man. And while there is no guarantee that a random black person will be able to run faster than a random white person, if I was to bet on who was faster, I would bet on the black person, because the majority of the time I would be right.

And while it would be nice to believe that all humans are born equal to all other humans, that just isn't the case. You aren't born equal to your brother or your sister or your mother or your father or your neighbor or your friends or anyone else. And in the same way that Asians are shorter than whites and black, there are other "trends" that differ from one group of people to the next. Hell, even in Europe they have these debates over which white people from which white country is the most intelligent.

Germans are brainiest (but at least we're smarter than the French) - Times Online

What I'm saying is, because humans are inherently unequal, you can never create and enforce a policy for equality, because such a policy is inherently flawed. And the only way to provide equality is to promote competition. Because only competition can produce equality, in the sense that only the cream of the crop will rise to the top, regardless of race.

And while I don't mean to argue that black people are inferior, because I don't believe that at all. What I will say is that the "average" black person scores lower on standardized tests than whites and asians. And even if people will say it is because of cultural bias, I'll remind you that asians score higher than blacks. And also, hispanics are actually poorer and less educated than blacks, and a large percentage of them don't even speak English, and they still score higher than blacks on standardized tests, on average.

This whole egalitarian idea that humans are born equal is so ridiculously flawed, I don't understand how anyone with the ability to think wouldn't be able to see right through it. Some people are just born more intelligent than others. And this is not an attack on blacks or native-americans or asians, this is an attack on that flawed ideology itself. I know plenty of people who are just mentally handicapped, that includes white people and black people and every shade in-between. No matter how much you try to explain to them algebra or geometry or philosophy or whatever, they just can't grasp the concept, because they are incapable of understanding it. And some families seem to produce more of those people, while other familes seem to produce people of much higher intellect and understanding. Sure part of it is environmental, but part of it is biological, and therefore it cannot be overcome by wishful thinking.

And because we exist in the constraints of imperfect humans, I am left trying to decide on the best policy that can be applied to ensure as much fairness as possible. And the only medicine I can prescribe is more competition. Because the only areas where blacks were able to overcome white racism before there was government intervention, were in the places that were most competitive.

And as sad as it is, I think black athletes and entertainers have done far more to end racism, than the Al Sharptons, Jesse Jacksons, or even Martin Luther Kings of the world. I personally believe those people did more to divide us than anything else, because their agenda was to use government to force their ideological views on everyone. I would say people like Jackie Robinson, Joe Lewis, Jim Brown, and Jesse Owens were far far more influential in changing the perspective of Americans than any of those other men. As well as Jazz music legends such as Louis Armstrong and Duke Ellington for changing the culture of America.

I personally find that most of the credit for making America more tolerant is handed to the wrong people. If you think the white haters Malcolm X and Martin Luther King should be given credit for slowing racism, you are completely brainwashed by liberal idealism. They did absolutely nothing to stop racism, and in practically every way they made it worse. During their days, rioting and violence was everywhere. If you think Martin Luther King had any respect for white people, you are completely mistaken. He was a white hating communist. And his FBI file is sealed for like another 30 years, because they don't want to taint the myth that surrounds him, with the truth of who he really was.


Basically, I believe racism can only be overcome if people voluntarily interact with one another for their mutual benefit. Jackie Robinson played for the Dodgers because he benefited, the Dodgers benefited, the players benefited, and the fans benefited. Sure it took a little while before they came to respect one another, but once they realized the nature of this mutually beneficial relationship, Jackie Robinson became a legend. And he paved the way for more and more black athletes to transcend race in other sports, and now blacks represent the vast majority of athletes in both football and basketball. So we know that once the concept of racial superiority is shown to be a fallacy, the whole concept of racism is destroyed, and only merit is left standing. But if you attempt to create racial equality by destroying merit itself, in an attempt to create your idealic world, then you actually help to buoy the concept of racial superiority, leading to a higher recognition of racial identity, otherwise known as racism.

And while being a racist is taboo in our society, trust me, it is much more common than what most people would like to believe. And I feel like a lot of that racial animosity seems to stem from the government assistance and special programs that disproportionately benefit one group over another group, while constantly slamming those racial classifications in our faces day-in and day-out. And I believe that without the presence of a racial governmental bias, and without the use of force to push a social agenda, that the argument for racism would basically "have no legs". And if the best way to get rid of it, is for people to simply stop talking about it. But people aren't going to stop talking about it as long as by talking about it they can continue to extort more benefits for themselves.

Even Obama himself is only the president because of affirmative-action. He smoked pot throughout high school, got terrible grades, and only made it into prestigious universities because of the color of his skin(in which he is actually bi-racial, but claims to be black). And while many might hold that up as a great triumph of affirmative-action. Others believe Obama is the perfect example of ideology rather than ability or experience. In fact many might argue the only reason he is the president today, is actually BECAUSE of the color of his skin.

The truth is, if Obama had been white, coming from the exact same economic background, he would not be the president today, period. If Obama had been white and had been a pothead in highschool, and making bad grades, he never would have made it into Columbia college, and he couldn't have dreamed of making it into Harvard law school. There could be thousands of "white Obama's" out there right now who are getting passed over because of our unfair system of racial bias.

And maybe if we didn't have such a big government system to enforce our social agendas, we might start electing more small government presidents, who don't believe in bombing and invading every foreign country that doesn't share our same big government ideals. That's if we were actually consistent in our ideals to begin with, and yes, I mean you Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, Syria, Egypt, Yemen, Sudan, Iran, Pakistan..... Not you, Libya, Iraq, Afghanistan... and whoever's next.

Last edited by Redshadowz; 03-30-2011 at 01:48 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 02:09 AM
 
Location: Midwest City, Oklahoma
7,192 posts, read 4,349,282 times
Reputation: 2647
Lastly, to better understand my seemingly almost hypocritical statements on race and equality.

Humans came from africa, I'm sure you are aware of that. They left Africa in relatively recent history, and there have been very few actual genetic mutations that have occurred in that short timeframe. In fact, the differences between non-Africans(Asians, caucasians, and native-americans) are smaller than the differences between Africans themselves. In fact, almost all characteristics identified as being "Asian" or "White" would have existed in the original Africans that migrated out of Africa.

The seemingly large differences between whites and Asians are not from genetic mutations, but are actually mostly from things like the founder effect, and genetic drift, and to a lesser extent sexual selection.

What I'm saying is, since almost all of human diversity exists in all human groups, and even more human diversity exists in Africans themselves. The racial "trends" can easily be overcome by what amounts to more "natural selection".

Basically, there are plenty of known genes for thousands of different illnesses or susceptabilities. It would be fairly easy to "weed out" those undesirable genes. And what would be left would be what amounts to a sort of "racial equality" because the genes that would be left would be roughly the same in all groups.

I mean, in the most basic sense, in a few generations you could easily raise the average Asian height to be roughly equal to the average Northern-European height. And this same methodology could be employed to make other aspects of humanity "more equal".


I just don't think people have the ability to perceive others as being equal unless they are actually equal. Unless the differences that exist in each group from the other, are equally valued in society.

But since being tall is of much more value than being short. And being intelligent is valued much more than basically anything else in life. If there are differences that exist, you will forever be in an uphill battle to try provide any level of equality.

I mean, I am sure people with schizophrenia are much less successful than people without it. Schizophrenia is also well-known to run in families(genetic). So what needs to be done about it? Schizophrenia is undesirable, and people with it are not going to ever be equal to people without it. And that can never be overcome without implementing an unfair policy that gives people with schizophrenia special priviledges or hiring priority over people without it. Which really makes about as much sense to me as all the other affirmative-action programs, in that they are extremely counterproductive. And they nothing to actually address the underlying problem, which is that humans are simply not equal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 09:34 AM
 
10,452 posts, read 10,267,101 times
Reputation: 12496
I'm not sure if RedShadowz posted this already or not, but I get overwhelmed by really long posts so I had a hard time reading your posts. Hopefully, I'm saying the same thing, but in summary.

The problem with Affirmative Action is it's a sloppy attempt to even the level playing ground for minorities. It's sloppy because it requires a lot of people to lower the bar for people to get in. This isn't an attempt at making a racist jab at people of color, implying that they're less intelligent. But there is still a large overlap between class and race in the U.S., meaning that the bulk of racial minorities are in the working class, and the working class in general doesn't get the same quality education as the middle and upper classes. With poorer education overall, it's no surprise that minorities as a whole score lower on test scores, or do worse in school. The only way rich schools can tout diversity is by offering scholarships and lowering their bar for students who haven't had the same exposure to education as the majority of their student base. But if instead we really get to the root of the problem and change the reasons why the majority of racial minorities make up the majority of the working class percentage-wise, then we won't need a clumsy system like Affirmative Action. In other words, we need to educate people about covert racism as well as overt racism and we need to teach minority families that are used to being held back socially for generation after generation that as long as they continue to see the world that way, they will continue to be figuratively chained. We also need to teach the world how to see people and not races. I know this sounds very hard to do, but it's actually not that hard if you start at a young age. Racism is taught. Young kids whose parents don't implant a shred of racism into their minds will grow up seeing races equally, not just consciously but subconsciously too. When that happens, things will even out naturally because the problem will have been changed from the root up. Racial minorities will get into schools and get jobs on their own merit, and the percentage of minorities in each socioeconomic level will even out. And of course, the need for Affirmative Action will disappear because minorities will be just as likely to be able to afford the same schools as the majority and will have just as much a chance of getting into good schools based on their education and upbringing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 09:41 AM
 
10,452 posts, read 10,267,101 times
Reputation: 12496
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redshadowz View Post
Did you know, around 1/5th of the population in this country has some form of disability, and about half of those don't work at all.
I'm trying to figure out how this relates to the topic at hand. Can you elaborate on the connection you see? Thanks.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 09:53 AM
 
Location: Albuquerque
2,294 posts, read 5,476,573 times
Reputation: 1085
No, it's normal to fear/dislike people of other colors, backgrounds, languages etc. America has a ton of problems from not being able to admit this.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 10:21 AM
 
44,762 posts, read 43,324,031 times
Reputation: 14450
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemon&lime View Post
No, it's normal to fear/dislike people of other colors, backgrounds, languages etc. America has a ton of problems from not being able to admit this.
Why would it be normal?

And furthermore, alot of problems have arisen from that dislike/fear.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 03-30-2011, 10:22 AM
 
10,452 posts, read 10,267,101 times
Reputation: 12496
Quote:
Originally Posted by lemon&lime View Post
No, it's normal to fear/dislike people of other colors, backgrounds, languages etc. America has a ton of problems from not being able to admit this.
Fear/dislike them till you meet one you like, sure, but it's not normal or natural to dislike or fear people even when you have met a few that either seem normal or that you like. To dislike/fear someone in the fact of contradictory evidence is a result of cultural conditioning.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top