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.
Why won't Blacks do that? Why are THEY living in the 1600s-1800s?
Furthermore, the racism and racial segregation links I posted exist in PRESENT DAYblue (Democrat) cities/states. That's racism in the 2000s for you.
Racism was Democrat-driven in the 1600-1800s, and it's STILL Democrat-driven in the 21st century.
1. Because it's their culture's history. Because they feel that it exemplifies an historical and ongoing phenomenon where Whites hate and or take advantage of Black people. On the other hand, how does what Democrats or Republicans did in the 1800s apply to you personally, other than a point of argumentation...almost a trivia point to throw out as a means of putting down the party you don't like?
2. Where do most Black people live? If you want to do it regionally -- it's the South. If you want to do it by state -- it's Texas, Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Maryland, Louisiana, Virginia, South Carolina, Alabama and Mississippi, and New York. Note that the majority of those states are southern states. If you want to do it by cities, it's New York City, Chicago, Detroit, Philadelphia, and Houston.
3. You always want to state your "facts", and then throw in your opinions as if they were facts: "Racism was Democrat-driven in the 1600-1800s, and it's STILL Democrat-driven in the 21st century."
What reason do you think they'll come up with for Blacks' current 72% unwed birth rate, which consequently results in a disproportionately high childhood and adult poverty rate?
I don't know.
Why don't you go out and ask some of them that personally, face to face.
I call BS on that. You're WAY TOO resistant to actual historic and current FACTS. That's not being a teacher, that's being a revisionist propaganda indoctrinator.
Sorry. You're simplified thinking doesn't cut it.
Facts need to be interpreted. In the old days, rote facts were taught and learned. Today education is more about critical thinking -- taking facts and using them to make conclusions and chart a course of action. Your course of action is to put down, not to do anything to improve the situation.
The inhumanity of human beings toward other human beings is not a new story, much less a local story. There is no need to hide it, because there are lessons we can learn from it. But there is also no need to distort it, so that sins of the whole human species around the world are presented as special defects of “our society†or the sins of a particular race.
If American society and Western civilization are different from other societies and civilizations, it is in that they eventually turned against slavery, and stamped it out, at a time when non-Western societies around the world were still maintaining slavery and resisting Western pressures to end slavery — including, in some cases, by armed resistance.
Only the fact that the West had more firepower put an end to slavery in many non-Western societies during the age of Western imperialism. Yet today there are Americans who have gone to Africa to apologize for slavery — on a continent where slavery has still not been completely ended, to this very moment.
It is not just the history of slavery that gets distorted beyond recognition by the selective filtering of facts. Those who mine history in order to find everything they can to undermine American society or Western civilization have very little interest in the Bataan death march, the atrocities of the Ottoman Empire, or similar atrocities in other times and places.
Here again, your data doesn't tell the whole story.
Back in 1975 I began teaching in Prince George's County, Maryland. They had been under court-ordered busing for just 2 years when I began working and living there. Our school -- Thomas Pullen JHS was racially integrated, although, as I recall, we were slightly majority Black. The school was inside the Beltway (I-495), making it a very high percentage of Black residents; for the purpose of the desegregation plan, we bused in students from Bowie, Maryland, at that time a majority White area. Bowie is now plurality Black. The neighborhood where I lived at the time was Lanham, which was fairly balanced racially; Lanham now is 64% Black.
Two years later, a new junior high opened just outside the Beltway -- Kettering JHS. It was in a clearly majority White neighborhood, but we were integrated. Kettering is now 91% Black. It's a middle class Black area, as is much of Prince George's County (approximately 65% Black).
You can't continually revamp busing and desegregation. PG County is where the Black flight from D.C. migrated toward, much more so than north to Montgomery County (now 17% Black) or northern Virginia to the west and southwest, which varies from 9% Black in Arlington County to 22% Black (Alexandria City).
Nobody is making the schools become segregated, it's just that the pattern of Black population has resulted in Black majority schools in most areas of Prince George's County.
The Democrats have added "superdelegates" that are not used by the Republican Party. The total of superdelegates equates to about 1/6th of the total delegates in the Democratic nominating process.
Superdelegates are votes for a nominee that are not pledged to a vote by the people. They are, in effect, a trump card for the Democratic Party establishment to control the outcome of an election. In other words, your Democratic Party leaders are not overly concerned with the will of the people if it means they will be kicked off the gravy train. Surprise!
Bill O'Reilly doesn't speak for the Republican party, he happens to be a registered Independent, who voted for President Obama. Most of us don't even listen to him, so if people are basing their opinions by what a few say, then they are looking for the hate. Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson say a lot of crap, are we to take their hate and run with it and believe all Dems think this way, I would say, no!
This is the biggest problem most of you ASSUME those on Fox News are Republican when many are not and happen to be registered Democrats or Independent........people really need to stop ASSUMING! So now, should we all rally against Independents and claim they were the ones for slavery?
The idea that God or Christianity encourages or approves of slavery is shown to be false. In fact, anybody who was caught selling another person into slavery was to be executed. However, since voluntary slavery was widely practiced during biblical times, the Bible proscribes laws to protect the lives and health of slaves. Paul, the author of many of the New Testament writings, virtually ordered the Christian Philemon to release his Christian slave from his service to "do what is proper". In addition, numerous verses from the New Testament show that God values slaves as much as any free person and is not partial to anyone's standing before other people.
You certainly don't know the Bible or how people could not read it for themselves. Most people were not educated enough to read, let alone had the money to own one.
1. The vast majority of Democrat superdelegates were elected officials. Elected. Representatives of the general public.
2. If you think Bill O'Reilly is an independent and that with any frequency that he votes for a Democrat, you are seriously deluded.
3. It is true that most American churches said slavery was wrong. And yet, particularly throughout the South, most slave owners were long-time members of those churches.
1. The vast majority of Democrat superdelegates were elected officials. Elected. Representatives of the general public.
2. If you think Bill O'Reilly is an independent and that with any frequency that he votes for a Democrat, you are seriously deluded.
3. It is true that most American churches said slavery was wrong. And yet, particularly throughout the South, most slave owners were long-time members of those churches.
At the height of slavery between 5-6 percent of whites in the south owned slaves.
At the height of slavery between 5-6 percent of whites in the south owned slaves.
Doesn't matter. The rest endorsed it and saw the racial caste system as beneficial to maintain white supremacy. Poor whites aspired to join the planter class one day with slaves of their own.
That's why so many poor whites (damn near all the whites in the south) were so fanatical about the war even if few had more than slave or two.
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.
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.
