• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 16:17
CEST 22:17
KST 05:17
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
uThermal's 2v2 Tour: $15,000 Main Event5Serral wins EWC 202543Tournament Spotlight: FEL Cracow 202510Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202580RSL Season 1 - Final Week9
Community News
Weekly Cups (Jul 28-Aug 3): herO doubles up6LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments5[BSL 2025] H2 - Team Wars, Weeklies & SB Ladder10EWC 2025 - Replay Pack4Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced63
StarCraft 2
General
Rogue Talks: "Koreans could dominate again" uThermal's 2v2 Tour: $15,000 Main Event The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread Official Ladder Map Pool Update (April 28, 2025)
Tourneys
SC2's Safe House 2 - October 18 & 19 LiuLi Cup - August 2025 Tournaments $5,100+ SEL Season 2 Championship (SC: Evo) WardiTV Mondays RSL Season 2 Qualifier Links and Dates
Strategy
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 485 Death from Below Mutation # 484 Magnetic Pull Mutation #239 Bad Weather Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars
Brood War
General
ASL Season 20 Ro24 Groups BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ StarCraft player reflex TE scores BW General Discussion Google Play ASL (Season 20) Announced
Tourneys
KCM 2025 Season 3 Small VOD Thread 2.0 [Megathread] Daily Proleagues [ASL20] Online Qualifiers Day 2
Strategy
Fighting Spirit mining rates [G] Mineral Boosting Simple Questions, Simple Answers Muta micro map competition
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread Total Annihilation Server - TAForever Beyond All Reason [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok)
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine The Games Industry And ATVI European Politico-economics QA Mega-thread
Fan Clubs
INnoVation Fan Club SKT1 Classic Fan Club!
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread [Manga] One Piece Movie Discussion! Anime Discussion Thread Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Gtx660 graphics card replacement Installation of Windows 10 suck at "just a moment" Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
TeamLiquid Team Shirt On Sale The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Gaming After Dark: Poor Slee…
TrAiDoS
[Girl blog} My fema…
artosisisthebest
Sharpening the Filtration…
frozenclaw
ASL S20 English Commentary…
namkraft
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 797 users

US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1951

Forum Index > Closed
Post a Reply
Prev 1 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 10093 Next
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please.

In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up!

NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious.
Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action.
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21689 Posts
May 12 2015 21:40 GMT
#39001
On May 13 2015 06:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
Quick: List the first four words that pop into your mind when you hear NASA.

If you are like most folks, you hit some mix of astronauts, moon landings, space telescopes and Mars probes. Those are pretty positive images representing accomplishments we can all feel proud about.

Astronauts are, after all, great American heroes. And space telescopes are reminders of just how smart — and insanely capable — Americans can be. Put it all together and you can see why NASA does superhero stuff in the eyes of most people.

It's also stuff that's universally recognized to be the kind where you absolutely, positively can't afford to be wrong. And that is why NASA is a real problem for climate denialism.

If you are intent on convincing people there is no climate change, then the last thing you want is NASA — with all its heroism and accuracy — telling folks climate change is real. So, faced with this dilemma, climate denialist's have come up with a clever solution: Get NASA out of climate change science.

As has been widely reported, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee recently approved a bill that would cut at least $300 million from NASA's earth-science budget. This comes after the head of the Senate committee overseeing NASA claimed the agency should stop doing earth-science and focus only on space exploration.

Both these moves are part of a broader effort to hobble American science from doing its job in exploring the planet's climate. As reported by Elizabeth Kolbert in the New Yorker:

"The vote on the NASA bill came just a week after the same House committee approved major funding cuts to the National Science Foundation's [NSF] geosciences program, as well as cuts to Department of Energy programs that support research into new energy sources."

But even with the broader effort, the emphasis on NASA seems particularly pointed. How many people even know what the NSF stands for — or what the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) does all day?

But NASA is different. Every kid knows NASA. Every parent knows NASA. NASA is cool. NASA is Superman.

So, when NASA tells us that Earth's climate is changing because of human activity, it carries a lot weight. It's a weight climate denialists have a hard time bearing up under.


Source

NASA has been getting cuts a lot. Blaming climat denies might be a bit rash.
That said it is beyond stupid to put people who do not believe in science in charge of funding science...
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
ZasZ.
Profile Joined May 2010
United States2911 Posts
May 12 2015 21:41 GMT
#39002
On May 13 2015 06:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Show nested quote +
Quick: List the first four words that pop into your mind when you hear NASA.

If you are like most folks, you hit some mix of astronauts, moon landings, space telescopes and Mars probes. Those are pretty positive images representing accomplishments we can all feel proud about.

Astronauts are, after all, great American heroes. And space telescopes are reminders of just how smart — and insanely capable — Americans can be. Put it all together and you can see why NASA does superhero stuff in the eyes of most people.

It's also stuff that's universally recognized to be the kind where you absolutely, positively can't afford to be wrong. And that is why NASA is a real problem for climate denialism.

If you are intent on convincing people there is no climate change, then the last thing you want is NASA — with all its heroism and accuracy — telling folks climate change is real. So, faced with this dilemma, climate denialist's have come up with a clever solution: Get NASA out of climate change science.

As has been widely reported, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee recently approved a bill that would cut at least $300 million from NASA's earth-science budget. This comes after the head of the Senate committee overseeing NASA claimed the agency should stop doing earth-science and focus only on space exploration.

Both these moves are part of a broader effort to hobble American science from doing its job in exploring the planet's climate. As reported by Elizabeth Kolbert in the New Yorker:

"The vote on the NASA bill came just a week after the same House committee approved major funding cuts to the National Science Foundation's [NSF] geosciences program, as well as cuts to Department of Energy programs that support research into new energy sources."

But even with the broader effort, the emphasis on NASA seems particularly pointed. How many people even know what the NSF stands for — or what the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) does all day?

But NASA is different. Every kid knows NASA. Every parent knows NASA. NASA is cool. NASA is Superman.

So, when NASA tells us that Earth's climate is changing because of human activity, it carries a lot weight. It's a weight climate denialists have a hard time bearing up under.


Source


I mean, I understand what Republicans are doing and why they are doing it, but I can't see any reason why NASA should be in charge of climate science and I do think they should focus on space exploration.

I also see little benefit in continuing to dump millions of dollars into climate change science. Whether you agree with climate change or not, minds are pretty much made up on this already. IMO, it's time to stop studying (so much) and start doing (more). I'll leave this here, because it conveys this point much better than I ever could:+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]
Gorsameth
Profile Joined April 2010
Netherlands21689 Posts
May 12 2015 21:42 GMT
#39003
On May 13 2015 06:41 ZasZ. wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:25 {CC}StealthBlue wrote:
Quick: List the first four words that pop into your mind when you hear NASA.

If you are like most folks, you hit some mix of astronauts, moon landings, space telescopes and Mars probes. Those are pretty positive images representing accomplishments we can all feel proud about.

Astronauts are, after all, great American heroes. And space telescopes are reminders of just how smart — and insanely capable — Americans can be. Put it all together and you can see why NASA does superhero stuff in the eyes of most people.

It's also stuff that's universally recognized to be the kind where you absolutely, positively can't afford to be wrong. And that is why NASA is a real problem for climate denialism.

If you are intent on convincing people there is no climate change, then the last thing you want is NASA — with all its heroism and accuracy — telling folks climate change is real. So, faced with this dilemma, climate denialist's have come up with a clever solution: Get NASA out of climate change science.

As has been widely reported, the House Science, Space and Technology Committee recently approved a bill that would cut at least $300 million from NASA's earth-science budget. This comes after the head of the Senate committee overseeing NASA claimed the agency should stop doing earth-science and focus only on space exploration.

Both these moves are part of a broader effort to hobble American science from doing its job in exploring the planet's climate. As reported by Elizabeth Kolbert in the New Yorker:

"The vote on the NASA bill came just a week after the same House committee approved major funding cuts to the National Science Foundation's [NSF] geosciences program, as well as cuts to Department of Energy programs that support research into new energy sources."

But even with the broader effort, the emphasis on NASA seems particularly pointed. How many people even know what the NSF stands for — or what the National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) does all day?

But NASA is different. Every kid knows NASA. Every parent knows NASA. NASA is cool. NASA is Superman.

So, when NASA tells us that Earth's climate is changing because of human activity, it carries a lot weight. It's a weight climate denialists have a hard time bearing up under.


Source


I mean, I understand what Republicans are doing and why they are doing it, but I can't see any reason why NASA should be in charge of climate science and I do think they should focus on space exploration.

I also see little benefit in continuing to dump millions of dollars into climate change science. Whether you agree with climate change or not, minds are pretty much made up on this already. IMO, it's time to stop studying (so much) and start doing (more). I'll leave this here, because it conveys this point much better than I ever could:+ Show Spoiler +
[image loading]

NASA is in the business of climate study because a lot of the data comes from satellites.
It ignores such insignificant forces as time, entropy, and death
Chocolate
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States2350 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 21:49:20
May 12 2015 21:44 GMT
#39004
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

If you honestly think blacks can't be racist then I think you need to reread the definition of racism

Racism doesn't necessarily need to be institutionalized; any given act can be racist. You can't just change the definition of something to fit what you want it to be. Black people can be and sometimes are racist, though of course not to the extent that whites have been historically and to the present day
Nyxisto
Profile Joined August 2010
Germany6287 Posts
May 12 2015 21:51 GMT
#39005
I think it's futile to have a semantics discussion about what deserves to be called racist or not, but there is a point to the argument that it actually matters whether a majority pressures a minority or the other way around. The majority of any given country pretty much does not need to care about their basic rights for a second. It's always easy to argue from such a position and it's a little silly to act like your way of life is threatened by some comment if you outnumber any other group by 10:1.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23238 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 21:55:47
May 12 2015 21:52 GMT
#39006
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.



Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

On May 13 2015 06:44 Chocolate wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

If you honestly think blacks can't be racist then I think you need to reread the definition of racism

Racism doesn't necessarily need to be institutionalized; any given act can be racist. You can't just change the definition of something to fit what you want it to be. Black people can be and sometimes are racist, though of course not to the extent that whites have been historically and to the present day



I'm done trying to explain why a white dictionary edited by white people doesn't get the only and final word on what the word racism means.

Beyond that, call it whatever you want to call it, but it's not the same thing.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Anesthetic
Profile Joined April 2012
United States225 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 22:02:06
May 12 2015 21:58 GMT
#39007
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios (affirmative action) that are completely unfair to whites in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college, and getting into an ivy league school because of affirmative action is a HUGE benefit.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".


JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
May 12 2015 22:01 GMT
#39008
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.
{CC}StealthBlue
Profile Blog Joined January 2003
United States41117 Posts
May 12 2015 22:04 GMT
#39009
Corrections officers use unnecessary and excessive violence against mentally ill inmates in the United States, often as punishment for nonthreatening behavior that is tied to prisoners’ illnesses, according to a report released Thursday (PDF) by Human Rights Watch (HRW).

After reviewing hundreds of class-action cases and investigations by the Department of Justice and interviewing hundreds of correctional institute staffers, psychiatrists and inmate advocates, HRW said it found that violence against prisoners with mental illnesses was often unwarranted and is “widespread and may be increasing” in U.S. prisons and jails.

“Jails and prisons can be dangerous, damaging and even deadly places for men and women with mental health problems,” Jamie Fellner, a senior adviser at Human Rights Watch and the author of the report, said in a statement. “Force is used against prisoners even when, because of their illness, they cannot understand or comply with staff orders.”

Staff members at jails and prisons are allowed to use force when it is necessary to control dangerous or disruptive prisoners. But correctional staffers often apply force when mentally ill prisoners exhibit nonthreatening behavior related to illnesses such as schizophrenia or bipolar disorder, the report found. That use of force often includes shackling inmates to chairs for days, shocking them with stun guns and using pepper spray on them, sometimes resulting in death, the report said.

If a mentally ill inmate urinates on the floor, for example, or bangs on a cell door or refuses to leave his or her cell, “the default response of staff may be the use of force,” HRW said.

Mentally ill inmates are more likely disobey orders and break rules more often than other prisoners, the report said, and they are often targeted with violence from staff as punishment.


Source
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam, this is bowling. There are rules."
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23238 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 22:17:26
May 12 2015 22:09 GMT
#39010
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

If it's any consolation one day white people wont be the overwhelming power structure and racism likely really will flow the other way, particularly if people mostly on the right but not exclusively, don't stop arguing out of their ass about this stuff.
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Djabanete
Profile Blog Joined May 2008
United States2786 Posts
May 12 2015 22:18 GMT
#39011
I think GH's point with the welfare was that people who ask "why haven't black people figured their **** out already" (a sentiment echoed incessantly, especially in response to events like in Baltimore) could also ask themselves why white people haven't figured their **** out already, and that whatever answer you come up with for the second question --- it's hard for poor people to stop being poor, and/or they were screwed over or are still being screwed over --- goes for the first as well. I think GH's point is that people who ignore the second question while harping on the first are therefore seeking to find fault along racial lines, and that there is a word for that.

I also think that if you couldn't tell that was his/her point, you're not trying very hard.
May the BeSt man win.
Wolfstan
Profile Joined March 2011
Canada605 Posts
May 12 2015 22:18 GMT
#39012
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Show nested quote +
Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source


Wow am I seriously this color blind when debating race issues? It seems like the article says that the old and disable eat up the most of social spending, and the employed are taking up most of social security, regardless of race. I seriously don't even care how many of them are black or hispanic, only that they are old, disabled, secure in their retirement. How is not caring about someones race not the dominant viewpoint down in America?

On a tangent, up in Canada our government is being lobbied hard against political goodies for those who aren't poor. How is it a bad thing when everyone get's a little something come budget time? The rich get deductions on donations, the middle get 401ks, IRAs and social security, the poor get TANF, SSI, SNAP, EITC and Child tax benefit. Now the conservative in me hopes the government doesn't waste money buying votes but the pragmatist in me gets it. I mean(sarcastically) how dare the government court all citizens come election time!
EG - ROOT - Gambit Gaming
Anesthetic
Profile Joined April 2012
United States225 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 22:21:23
May 12 2015 22:20 GMT
#39013
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

[quote]
Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23238 Posts
May 12 2015 22:23 GMT
#39014
On May 13 2015 07:20 Anesthetic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

Then we'll have commentators asking what's wrong with the white community that even after hundreds of years of oppressing everyone else they still have so many poor people who often turn to a life of crime. How almost 40 exclusively white administrations couldn't help with so much white poverty and crime.

How even when white people controlled everything there has always been more white people on government aid than any other group.

Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.


But you think white people do... jfc
"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Anesthetic
Profile Joined April 2012
United States225 Posts
May 12 2015 22:27 GMT
#39015
On May 13 2015 07:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:20 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:40 Chocolate wrote:
The way elections work in this country ensure that the majority of the population (if this majority is rather ubiquitious, like with % of people that are religious) will be overrepresented in government. I don't think you should antagonize Republicans for their demographics, they represent their electorate decently well (other than in terms of gender, but they tend to be more religious/conservative and so women may not even want to run).

[quote]
Oh fuck off, maybe it's because when white people are in government they don't exclusively focus on the needs of white people? And this is a bad thing?


lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
[quote]

Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.


But you think white people do... jfc

This thread has a knack for making people put words in my mouth, its quite incredible to see how quickly you guys resort to this.
GreenHorizons
Profile Blog Joined April 2011
United States23238 Posts
May 12 2015 22:29 GMT
#39016
On May 13 2015 07:27 Anesthetic wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:20 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
On May 13 2015 03:43 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

lol, you realize every time anything racial comes up that line (or some variation) is trotted out about Obama and the black community.

It's pretty funny that it would upset you, and suddenly the non-sensible nature of the comment becomes readily apparent. Even though 40 administrations is a long time and many of them certainly did focus exclusively on white issues. For several administrations black people weren't even considered people,let alone constituents or Americans.

If black people don't have an excuse for poverty and crime related to historical transgressions than white people have even less of an excuse for all the poverty and crime we see in their communities. They were practically the only ones legally able to own land when the government was handing it out for free, yet there are still sooo many impoverished white folk, what's wrong with their communities that even after hundreds of years of oppressing their competition so many white folk are still so poor?

Why after dozens of white administrations do white people still suck up the majority of government aid. What is wrong with the white community that they still aren't on their feet? Whites were never property in the United States, they never had laws that deprived their right to own land because they were white? Whites have had every opportunity to pick themselves up or just take one of countless hand-out/ups from the government like free land, 0% minority representation, slave labor, etc...

Yet with all of that and more white people still suck up more government aid than any other group.


Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

[quote]


Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.


But you think white people do... jfc

This thread has a knack for making people put words in my mouth, its quite incredible to see how quickly you guys resort to this.


No ones putting anything in your mouth. Where did you get your definition of racism from? Was it originally written or determined by non-white people?

"People like to look at history and think 'If that was me back then, I would have...' We're living through history, and the truth is, whatever you are doing now is probably what you would have done then" "Scratch a Liberal..."
Anesthetic
Profile Joined April 2012
United States225 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 22:32:15
May 12 2015 22:31 GMT
#39017
On May 13 2015 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:27 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:20 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
[quote]

Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.


But you think white people do... jfc

This thread has a knack for making people put words in my mouth, its quite incredible to see how quickly you guys resort to this.


No ones putting anything in your mouth. Where did you get your definition of racism from? Was it originally written or determined by non-white people?


Its my own personal definition, from what I personally experienced and have concluded to be as racism. Doesn't matter to me what you or any other white people think, and it generally seems to be the more accepted definition.
JonnyBNoHo
Profile Joined July 2011
United States6277 Posts
May 12 2015 22:31 GMT
#39018
On May 13 2015 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:27 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:20 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:02 Wolfstan wrote:
[quote]

Are you being sarcastic like that surfer riot video? Because I'm really not sure.


The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

Another finding of the study is that the distribution of benefits no longer aligns with the demography of poverty. African-Americans, who make up 22 percent of the poor, receive 14 percent of government benefits, close to their 12 percent population share.

White non-Hispanics, who make up 42 percent of the poor, receive 69 percent of government benefits – again, much closer to their 64 percent population share.



Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]
According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.


But you think white people do... jfc

This thread has a knack for making people put words in my mouth, its quite incredible to see how quickly you guys resort to this.


No ones putting anything in your mouth. Where did you get your definition of racism from? Was it originally written or determined by non-white people?


So.. the dictionary definition isn't good enough because it comes from white people.

Uh-huh.
Ghostcom
Profile Joined March 2010
Denmark4782 Posts
Last Edited: 2015-05-12 22:35:42
May 12 2015 22:33 GMT
#39019
Could the reason why you have to repeatedly have to explain it perhaps be because what you are "explaining" is a shitty concept trying to redefine a word which has long held a meaning covering EXACTLY what you are now trying to claim it not to cover?

Racism has historically always meant any prejudice, discrimination or antagonism based upon race. What you are talking about is at best an academic term which has been ill established and at worst a modern day attempt at shaming the white patriarchy in the same vein as "check your privilege" is used to silence those with differing opinions to your based on a lack of lived experience (the shittiest argumentation in the world). Furthermore you are cherrypicking examples. Firstly, you conveniently fail to mention affirmative action (woops?) and secondly I would for example like to see the study you are talking about done in a black community... I somehow doubt the whites are the most likely to receive a call.

If anything it's the concept that you are trying to define that needs a new word...

EDIT: It actually even already has a term: "Institutionalized racism"
Anesthetic
Profile Joined April 2012
United States225 Posts
May 12 2015 22:34 GMT
#39020
On May 13 2015 07:31 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
Show nested quote +
On May 13 2015 07:29 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:27 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:23 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:20 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 07:09 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:58 Anesthetic wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:06 Anesthetic wrote:
@GreenHorizons

I think your on a thin line here, while I understand your points about blacks having unique problems that whites can't understand, at the very same time this can so easily turn into the "Blacks can't be racist" type of thoughts that are just so incredibly dumb.

Things have to be taken in an objective manner and thats quite a big problem with the Social Justice Movement, because even though YOU are using proper arguments/logic, a lot of those movements prefer to just act like nobody except blacks can comment on black issues, even if they have much stronger evidence. While I completely understand that whites will never know what its like to be a minority in this country(I am Mexican myself), there always have to be an effort to remain objective.



Blacks can't be racist, they don't have the institutional power to be racist. They can act on prejudices but they lack the institutionalized power to make those prejudices standard practice.

If one refuses to accept the delineation and difference between acting on prejudices and racism than sure black people can be racist too. Of course such an understanding betrays a woeful lack of understanding of what prejudice and racism actually are.

On May 13 2015 06:14 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 05:19 GreenHorizons wrote:
[quote]

The tone? Yes a bit, I am mimicking the standard talking points/rhetoric used when racial injustice issues come up. The facts are the facts though. Almost 70% of government benefits go to white people. White people have had every opportunity everyone else has and then some in America. If the problems black people face are supposed to be primarily of their own making surely the heavy burden white people put on the government and hard working Americans who pay for those benefits white people overwhelmingly receive is also of their own making?

[quote]


Source

According to your data table white are mainly receiving benefits tied to their contributions (social security) while blacks and hispanics are receiving benefits tied to their economic circumstances (poor / unemployed). The benefits to blacks would be dis-proportionally paid for by whites, which would make the whole system re-distributive from whites to blacks and hispanics.


Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

You don't necessarily have to have institutionalized power to be racist. If you are a white kid in a pre-dominantly black school then you will definitely experience racism at some point. I can say for certain that I have experienced racism on part from blacks.

And I have to very much disagree. A black kid raised in a medium income family, in an environment that is "Average" for whites, will have an advantage over his white peers that were in exactly the same conditions. Rich black families will have a HUGE advantage over an "average" white family. This is what personally irks me, that people are making such blanket scenarios that are completely unfair in some conditions. Sure, that black kid might suffer from racism at some point in his life, but he has a much higher chance than comparable white kids when he applies to college.

Like i said, that kind of thinking has absolutely no place in a civilized and fair society. Racism is something that has to be dealt with carefully on EVERY step, and we can't just jump to conclusions and ignore evidence on the pretext that "blacks can't be racist".




So frustrating explaining the same things over and over again. What you're describing is prejudice. If you want to call it racism so it makes you feel better fine, but then you have to have a different name for when it becomes institutionalized and systemic.

I don't mean in one particular school, county or state either. Because they all fall under a larger umbrella of white privilege and institutional racism that they don't have over whites on a comparable level.

The problem I think stems from the mistaken notion that individual cases of prejudices are universally less bad than racism. That's just not true. A black business owner who chooses not to hire any white people because they are white is doing something just as individually bad as the white owner who refuses to hire black people because they are black. The difference is in the disparate impact. If no black businesses hired white people that's not nearly the same problem as no white owned businesses hiring black people.

So while on the individual level what they are doing is practically the same, the real world impact outside of their personal sphere is dramatically different.

This is evidenced by the study with resumes with black vs white sounding names. The difference between racism and prejudice should crystallize for most people there.

Even if every black person was out right KKK type 'racist' against whites they can't change the fact that white names will get called back more often.

If you still can't see the difference or the importance of separating the two with different words I don't think I have the patience to help you.

On May 13 2015 07:01 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:52 GreenHorizons wrote:
On May 13 2015 06:35 JonnyBNoHo wrote:
[quote]

Seriously, just skip to the personal insults and move on to someone/something else. We are both well aware we can't engage in productive discussion with each other.

I didn't mean any ill will. If you post what I consider to be bad information on a public forum I'm going to publicly note it. You are welcome to ignore my post, rather than engage, if you prefer.

Your post couldn't come off as more disingenuous if you tried man. There are tons of 'bad information' posts, you cherry pick which ones you want to 'publicly note' as being 'bad information'. It's transparent as all hell and you're not fooling anyone.

Slowly but surely as your posts have gone down in quality more and more people are getting wise to your non-sense. You may think your little "well some people/situations don't fit that pattern" one-liners are some revelation, without which the discussion would be woefully off course, but they are little more than childish rejoinders. The people for which you point out the most pointless 'flaws' in their argument is almost exclusively something they have already considered and is not relevant to the larger point. Evidenced by your remark about the redistributive nature of government benefits.

Yes, I tend to point out the bad information posts coming from the lefties. That's largely because when a righty makes a post, there are far more lefties here who will actively try to refute it. You guys generally don't need my help there and I don't enjoy piling on like a bunch of grim patrons.

As for the relevance of my post, I don't see why your 'larger point' should be taken seriously when it is built upon a bunch of garbage. If your posts cannot survive scrutiny, than your posts are a failure. It's up to you to make arguments that don't suck, and it's up to you to tackle any challenges to your opinions.


I should of known better than to let your inane comments push me to respond. Come on TL give me an ignore feature please!?

Racism is "the belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, especially so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races." According to any textbook definition I find on the internet, which is pretty much what I was describing, and not at all what you are describing. I do actually refer to the system of inequalities and feedback loops that keep minorities down as Institutionalized racism, I don't exactly think that you nor blacks have a copyright on what racism means to each person.


But you think white people do... jfc

This thread has a knack for making people put words in my mouth, its quite incredible to see how quickly you guys resort to this.


No ones putting anything in your mouth. Where did you get your definition of racism from? Was it originally written or determined by non-white people?


So.. the dictionary definition isn't good enough because it comes from white people.

Uh-huh.

Exactly, this kind of toxic thoughts is actually what keeps minorities down.I recently had a friend graduate from college and complain that the racist system didn't allow her to find a job, never mind the fact that she got a bachelors in African-American studies. Nope, ignore facts and evidence and just blame whites. I'm sure minorities will make loads of progress this way.
Prev 1 1949 1950 1951 1952 1953 10093 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
BSL
20:00
Team Wars - Round 2
Dewalt vs Sziky
ZZZero.O5
LiquipediaDiscussion
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
ZombieGrub768
SteadfastSC 166
StarCraft: Brood War
Britney 18337
Calm 3001
ggaemo 555
Jaedong 383
Larva 321
actioN 190
TY 75
Mong 30
Aegong 29
NaDa 15
[ Show more ]
yabsab 10
IntoTheRainbow 7
ZZZero.O 5
ivOry 3
Stormgate
JuggernautJason129
RushiSC80
UpATreeSC73
Counter-Strike
Stewie2K162
Heroes of the Storm
Liquid`Hasu489
Khaldor178
Other Games
gofns14659
Grubby2720
fl0m1561
Beastyqt374
KnowMe150
Fuzer 98
oskar85
Livibee77
Trikslyr58
Sick26
EmSc Tv 22
Organizations
StarCraft 2
angryscii 22
Other Games
EmSc Tv 22
StarCraft 2
EmSc2Tv 22
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 20 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• kabyraGe 310
• davetesta29
• tFFMrPink 17
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
• IndyKCrew
StarCraft: Brood War
• 80smullet 29
• FirePhoenix11
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• WagamamaTV803
League of Legends
• Doublelift1631
• TFBlade1013
Other Games
• imaqtpie1402
• Shiphtur259
Upcoming Events
RSL Revival
5h 43m
RSL Revival
13h 43m
SC Evo League
15h 43m
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
18h 43m
CSO Cup
19h 43m
Sparkling Tuna Cup
1d 13h
uThermal 2v2 Circuit
1d 18h
Wardi Open
2 days
RotterdaM Event
2 days
Replay Cast
3 days
[ Show More ]
RSL Revival
3 days
The PondCast
5 days
Replay Cast
6 days
LiuLi Cup
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

ASL Season 20: Qualifier #2
FEL Cracow 2025
CC Div. A S7

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL 20 Team Wars
KCM Race Survival 2025 Season 3
BSL 21 Qualifiers
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
HCC Europe
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025

Upcoming

ASL Season 20
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
BSL 21 Team A
RSL Revival: Season 2
Maestros of the Game
SEL Season 2 Championship
WardiTV Summer 2025
Thunderpick World Champ.
MESA Nomadic Masters Fall
CS Asia Championships 2025
Roobet Cup 2025
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.