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.
I'm a white male and I have subjugated nobody. Most white males I know if not all of them aren't even in a position to subjugate anyone. There is definitely a blatant white male hate in the media and from the left. I'm not justifying the hate that other groups have received in the past by any means, but there is no doubt it is the current trend.
I too have noticed all of the commercials depicting white men as bumbling morons. I have also noticed all of the commercials these days tend to not be representative of the population. Far more black Americans in commercials than are represented in the population. And they usually act and dress very "white" in the commercials seemingly as to be "acceptable" to all races. I really don't care much who is in a commercial, but as a marketer it seems odd that the people producing commercials would be using actors that don't represent the population mix.
I know a lot of these posts are fake because there is no such thing as a purely heterosexual liberal male. They are all effeminate or some other version of girlie men.
They become girlie by their actions.. if they flame they are acting as a female role though they are obviously a male. They think themselves as a female and some exaggerate the quest to be noticed as feminine when they take on a role of a partner to a male.
“In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just ‘disappeared’ as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.” (magazine article)
“Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run!…We [in the U.S.] believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.” (sermon)
Are you disputing that the countries known as the west or western world are dominated by and primarily controlled by people of European descent, while most of the countries in the rest of the world are not?
Are you disputing that 9/11/01 was a wake up call or as George Bush put we have been "put on notice" that people or terrorists from the rest of the world can strike us even in the continental United States.
Or are you asserting that most Americans actually do have a good understanding of what the United States has done around the world and the possible ramifications of those actions.
This country was founded with racism built into the Constitution, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case.
"They [framers of the Declaration of Independence] perfectly understood the meaning of the language they used, and how it would be understood by others, and they knew that it would not in any part of the civilized world be supposed to embrace the negro race."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0060_0393_ZO.html
The question is simply this: can a negro whose ancestors were imported into this country and sold as slaves become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen, one of which rights is the privilege of suing in a court of the United States in the cases specified in the Constitution?
... We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate [p405] and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.
... In the opinion of the court, the legislation and histories of the times, and the language used in the Declaration of Independence, show that neither the class of persons who had been imported as slaves nor their descendants, whether they had become free or not, were then acknowledged as a part of the people, nor intended to be included in the general words used in that memorable instrument.
It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence and when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopted. But the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken. They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics which no one thought of disputing or supposed to be open to dispute, and men in every grade and position in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.
... They show that a perpetual and impassable barrier was intended to be erected between the white race and the one which they had reduced to slavery, and governed as subjects with absolute and despotic power, and which they then looked upon as so far below them in the scale of created beings, that intermarriages between white persons and negroes or mulattoes were regarded as unnatural and immoral, and punished as crimes, not only in the parties, but in the person who joined them in marriage. And no distinction in this respect was made between the free negro or mulatto and the slave, but this stigma of the deepest degradation was fixed upon the whole race.
... It then proceeds to say: We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among them is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. The general words above quoted would seem to embrace the whole human family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day would be so understood. But it is too clear for dispute that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration, for if the language, as understood in that day, would embrace them, the conduct of the distinguished men who framed the Declaration of Independence would have been utterly and flagrantly inconsistent with the principles they asserted, and instead of the sympathy of mankind to which they so confidently appealed, they would have deserved and received universal rebuke and reprobation. Yet the men who framed this declaration were great men -- high in literary acquirements, high in their sense of honor, and incapable of asserting principles inconsistent with those on which they were acting. They perfectly understood the meaning of the language they used, and how it would be understood by others, and they knew that it would not in any part of the civilized world be supposed to embrace the negro race, which, by common consent, had been excluded from civilized Governments and the family of nations, and doomed to slavery. They spoke and acted according to the then established doctrines and principles, and in the ordinary language of the day, and no one misunderstood them. The unhappy black race were separated from the white by indelible marks, and laws long before established, and were never thought of or spoken of except as property, and when the claims of the owner or the profit of the trader were supposed to need protection.
Far too many to this day still believe that those of African descent are inferior to those of European descent. This includes people of African descent. Unfortunately we have not totally eliminated racism and unequal treatment of U.S. citizens. The war on drugs is a prime example of unequal treatment that still exists today.
Are you disputing that the countries known as the west or western world are dominated by and primarily controlled by people of European descent, while most of the countries in the rest of the world are not?
Are you disputing that 9/11/01 was a wake up call or as George Bush put we have been "put on notice" that people or terrorists from the rest of the world can strike us even in the continental United States.
Or are you asserting that most Americans actually do have a good understanding of what the United States has done around the world and the possible ramifications of those actions.
This country was founded with racism built into the Constitution, as affirmed by the Supreme Court in the Dred Scott case.
"They [framers of the Declaration of Independence] perfectly understood the meaning of the language they used, and how it would be understood by others, and they knew that it would not in any part of the civilized world be supposed to embrace the negro race."
http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/historics/USSC_CR_0060_0393_ZO.html
The question is simply this: can a negro whose ancestors were imported into this country and sold as slaves become a member of the political community formed and brought into existence by the Constitution of the United States, and as such become entitled to all the rights, and privileges, and immunities, guarantied by that instrument to the citizen, one of which rights is the privilege of suing in a court of the United States in the cases specified in the Constitution? ... We think they are not, and that they are not included, and were not intended to be included, under the word "citizens" in the Constitution, and can therefore claim none of the rights and privileges which that instrument provides for and secures to citizens of the United States. On the contrary, they were at that time considered as a subordinate [p405] and inferior class of beings who had been subjugated by the dominant race, and, whether emancipated or not, yet remained subject to their authority, and had no rights or privileges but such as those who held the power and the Government might choose to grant them.
... In the opinion of the court, the legislation and histories of the times, and the language used in the Declaration of Independence, show that neither the class of persons who had been imported as slaves nor their descendants, whether they had become free or not, were then acknowledged as a part of the people, nor intended to be included in the general words used in that memorable instrument.
It is difficult at this day to realize the state of public opinion in relation to that unfortunate race which prevailed in the civilized and enlightened portions of the world at the time of the Declaration of Independence and when the Constitution of the United States was framed and adopted. But the public history of every European nation displays it in a manner too plain to be mistaken. They had for more than a century before been regarded as beings of an inferior order, and altogether unfit to associate with the white race either in social or political relations, and so far inferior that they had no rights which the white man was bound to respect, and that the negro might justly and lawfully be reduced to slavery for his benefit. He was bought and sold, and treated as an ordinary article of merchandise and traffic whenever a profit could be made by it. This opinion was at that time fixed and universal in the civilized portion of the white race. It was regarded as an axiom in morals as well as in politics which no one thought of disputing or supposed to be open to dispute, and men in every grade and position in society daily and habitually acted upon it in their private pursuits, as well as in matters of public concern, without doubting for a moment the correctness of this opinion.
... They show that a perpetual and impassable barrier was intended to be erected between the white race and the one which they had reduced to slavery, and governed as subjects with absolute and despotic power, and which they then looked upon as so far below them in the scale of created beings, that intermarriages between white persons and negroes or mulattoes were regarded as unnatural and immoral, and punished as crimes, not only in the parties, but in the person who joined them in marriage. And no distinction in this respect was made between the free negro or mulatto and the slave, but this stigma of the deepest degradation was fixed upon the whole race. ... It then proceeds to say: We hold these truths to be self-evident: that all men are created equal; that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights; that among them is life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness; that to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. The general words above quoted would seem to embrace the whole human family, and if they were used in a similar instrument at this day would be so understood. But it is too clear for dispute that the enslaved African race were not intended to be included, and formed no part of the people who framed and adopted this declaration, for if the language, as understood in that day, would embrace them, the conduct of the distinguished men who framed the Declaration of Independence would have been utterly and flagrantly inconsistent with the principles they asserted, and instead of the sympathy of mankind to which they so confidently appealed, they would have deserved and received universal rebuke and reprobation. Yet the men who framed this declaration were great men -- high in literary acquirements, high in their sense of honor, and incapable of asserting principles inconsistent with those on which they were acting. They perfectly understood the meaning of the language they used, and how it would be understood by others, and they knew that it would not in any part of the civilized world be supposed to embrace the negro race, which, by common consent, had been excluded from civilized Governments and the family of nations, and doomed to slavery. They spoke and acted according to the then established doctrines and principles, and in the ordinary language of the day, and no one misunderstood them. The unhappy black race were separated from the white by indelible marks, and laws long before established, and were never thought of or spoken of except as property, and when the claims of the owner or the profit of the trader were supposed to need protection.
Far too many to this day still believe that those of African descent are inferior to those of European descent. This includes people of African descent. Unfortunately we have not totally eliminated racism and unequal treatment of U.S. citizens. The war on drugs is a prime example of unequal treatment that still exists today.
If he is going to make blanket remarks about "white America" without clarifying that he doesn't mean all white Americans then yes he is talking about all white Americans. Continue to remain in denial it's fun to watch. I am sure I can dig up a few more examples from him also but what's the point you would continue to deny. Wright likes living in the past like some other blacks do and self-hating whites also. Playing the eternal victim card is what they do. I am done with this discussion as it is futile to make you see and accept the truth about Wright.
I'm a white male and I have subjugated nobody. Most white males I know if not all of them aren't even in a position to subjugate anyone. There is definitely a blatant white male hate in the media and from the left. I'm not justifying the hate that other groups have received in the past by any means, but there is no doubt it is the current trend.
I too have noticed all of the commercials depicting white men as bumbling morons. I have also noticed all of the commercials these days tend to not be representative of the population. Far more black Americans in commercials than are represented in the population. And they usually act and dress very "white" in the commercials seemingly as to be "acceptable" to all races. I really don't care much who is in a commercial, but as a marketer it seems odd that the people producing commercials would be using actors that don't represent the population mix.
Does that bother you as much as the fact that the epitome of what is good is related to being a white male? You do realize that eventhough white males are protrayed as being "bumbling morons" there are still more television shows and movies that protray them in positive and heroric roles? I think that Bill Cosby was one of the first black "good guys" on television (I Spy) and that was not until the 60's. The Asians did not get one until the 70's with Bruce Lee (Green Hornet). Native Americans, well I don't know unless you count the one that was crying in the 70's because everyone was littering.
The New York Times published another hit piece against white southerners today.
Of course, when blacks vote 93% for Obama there’s no conflict but the fact that a growing number of white Americans are trending to the Republican Party is a crisis.
It’s a good thing Democrats have a growing number of minority voters, many new to the country who don’t know any better, or they would be obliterated in national elections.
The trend clearly shows that white Americans, in record numbers, are rejecting the anti-American socialist policies of today’s Democratic party. Not just down south but across the US. It took four years of Barack Obama and Harry Reid for many Americans to figure this out.
The righties can't decide whether Democrats are trying to keep the white man down or the brown & black man.
The reality is the Democrats keep everybody down.
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.
