|
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. |
On August 27 2015 16:07 Mohdoo wrote:
That doesn't address what I'm saying at all. Fifty cent, Lil Wayne, Ludacris, Dr Dre, tons of other extremely recognized rappers that make up the majority of what we hear: what are their topics? Your point that there is deep, meaningful rap is meaningless. It's not about what exists, it's about what occupies the majority of what ends up being popular. I feel like you're being very dishonest here by pretending there isn't an issue with rap culture.
You understand the majority of the consumers in the US are white people right? Besides the fact that all of what you hear rappers talk about is all over every form of white media. Just calling bs, bs. The whole argument was crap to start with.
|
I find it really interesting that any argument about racism boils down to three camps:
A) Racism is real
B) Racism isn't real anymore
C) Fuck black people
It seems like the participants in the debate kinda settle the issue, no?
|
Pretty much. I also find it fucking hysterical that people thing "black culture" is leading the charge with depictions of gun violence and misogyny. Or the straight out of Compton does this, but American sniper doesn't. Or like every action movie with a brood male protagonist that murders 200 people because someone killed his child/wife/dog/truck/toolshed. But we better look out for that Rap music.
And the conservatives are now worried about a culture of gun violence when it's black people with guns. But guns for every white guy in American.
|
On August 27 2015 19:28 Plansix wrote:
(..)
And the conservatives are now worried about a culture of gun violence when it's black people with guns. But guns for every white guy in American.
There was a clip from fox maybe?, I saw on the Colbert report, where your typical fox anchorman argued in favor of guns with some black person (dont remember if he was an activist, expert, or what), maybe after Fergusson, or a mass shooting, whatever.
The anchor made the typical gunnut point that if there were even more guns around, the tragedy could have been prevented, and then the black person out of the blue asked if he would be okay with also arming the black population?
(the anchor shocked) "wo- what.. -whoa.. no" shit was hilarious :D
But alas I can't find it, I am sure someone here knows where could I find it again?
|
Black on black violence is at astronomical levels. It's an empty gesture but that doesn't mean it's not a serious issue.
|
On August 27 2015 21:44 heliusx wrote:
Black on black violence is at astronomical levels. It's an empty gesture but that doesn't mean it's not a serious issue.
Poor, disenfranchised people committing acts of violence against poor, disenfranchised people has always been an issue in every country. And the numbers are always high than people who are not poor and disenfranchised. Just because one racial demographic has a lot of poor, disenfranchised people and they all live in the same urban areas because it’s the only place they find housing doesn’t make it a caused by race.
So it’s an issue, but not because they are black. And the solution isn’t that “black people need to get it together.”
Edit: Yoav's post is still making me chuckle. That was some top tier stuff and sums up the discussion of racism in this thread nicely.
|
Are you trying to imply that I believe black's commit these crimes simply because they're black and that's what black's do? How did you say that little phrase of yours? Are you arguing with make believe people in your head?
|
United States43674 Posts
On August 27 2015 21:54 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2015 21:44 heliusx wrote:
Black on black violence is at astronomical levels. It's an empty gesture but that doesn't mean it's not a serious issue. Poor, disenfranchised people committing acts of violence against poor, disenfranchised people has always been an issue in every country. And the numbers are always high than people who are not poor and disenfranchised. Just because one racial demographic has a lot of poor, disenfranchised people and they all live in the same urban areas because it’s the only place they find housing doesn’t make it a caused by race. So it’s an issue, but not because they are black.
Hence why every now and then I come in with my British perspective and get a little racist against the Irish or the Catholics. Repressed and poor classes have always existed in every nation and if it weren't blacks taking it for the team in the US it'd just be someone else. In a nation that historically didn't have a black population the same systematic denial of opportunity, services, education and employment happened to groups of alien white people. This is about society, not about skin colour.
|
On August 27 2015 22:13 heliusx wrote:
Are you trying to imply that I believe black's commit these crimes simply because they're black and that's what black's do? How did you say that little phrase of yours? Are you arguing with make believe people in your head?
Well if you didn't mean that, what did you mean? Your post is 2 sentences long and doesn't provide a lot of insight into what you were attempting to say?
|
On August 27 2015 22:18 Plansix wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2015 22:13 heliusx wrote:
Are you trying to imply that I believe black's commit these crimes simply because they're black and that's what black's do? How did you say that little phrase of yours? Are you arguing with make believe people in your head? Well if you didn't mean that, what did you mean? Your post is 2 sentences long and doesn't provide a lot of insight into what you were attempting to say?
In particular, if you were instead wanting to talk about poor-on-poor violence, why would you not use that phrase instead of black-on-black? The way that a problem is phrased makes an implication as to what the cause is, whether you like it or not.
|
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donald-trump-mocks-asians-broken-english-speech-article-1.2338344?
Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump lampooned Asians during a campaign rally in Iowa, mocking them with broken English.
“Negotiating with Japan, negotiating with China,” Trump said during a Tuesday speech in Dubuque before folding his hands over his middle.
“When these people walk in the room, they don’t say, ‘Oh, hello! How’s the weather? It’s so beautiful outside. Isn’t it lovely? How are the Yankees doing? Oh they’re doing wonderful. Great,” Trump continued.
He put on an exaggerated scowl.
“They say, ‘We want deal!’” he bellowed.
The crowd rewarded him with laughter.
Trump did his stand-up routine the same day he took to Twitter to trash rival Jeb Bush for making a reference to Asians while discussing “anchor babies.”
He should take a second job as a comedian. Seems like it's working out for him.
|
I do find it cute that people are saying rap music makes black people violent on a video game site. Video game and nerd culture having been the scapegoat for every evil under the sun. Violence, satanism, misogyny, every single mass shooting ever. All obviously total nonsense. But here's some people trying to pull the same BS on someone else that's been pulled on them.
|
On August 27 2015 22:42 raNazUra wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2015 22:18 Plansix wrote:On August 27 2015 22:13 heliusx wrote:
Are you trying to imply that I believe black's commit these crimes simply because they're black and that's what black's do? How did you say that little phrase of yours? Are you arguing with make believe people in your head? Well if you didn't mean that, what did you mean? Your post is 2 sentences long and doesn't provide a lot of insight into what you were attempting to say? In particular, if you were instead wanting to talk about poor-on-poor violence, why would you not use that phrase instead of black-on-black? The way that a problem is phrased makes an implication as to what the cause is, whether you like it or not.
He didn't? It was heliusx using the term black-on-black violence...
However, this whole discussion is getting a bit out of hand, imho. I think that racism is real. However, I also believe it is quite a lot less widespread than black people seem to think it is. There is a second underlying problem which is the low social mobility in the US. That isn't caused by racism. However, it has the unfortunate effect that poor black communities will stay poor. Poor white communities will ALSO stay poor, however there are far less of them (if we ignore latinos for the moment).
Now the problem here is that either one is a confounding variable when looking at statistics of the other. People use the evidence for poor black people not being given a chance to move up in the world and blame it on racism. This has not been proven, and could equally well be due to low social mobility.
Now that doesn't mean we should just wash our hands of the problem, and because a large part of the poor population is black (or latino), it makes sense to use affirmative action as a means to an end. However, the end is not necessarily ending racism, it is improving social mobility.
Banks aren't racist because they deny people from black neighbourhoods loans. They are simply following the statistics. And the actuaries who have calculated it through say that loaning to people from certain parts of town is a poor RoI deal. Skin color does not factor into it.
|
United States22883 Posts
On August 27 2015 22:50 JinDesu wrote:http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donald-trump-mocks-asians-broken-english-speech-article-1.2338344?Show nested quote + Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump lampooned Asians during a campaign rally in Iowa, mocking them with broken English.
“Negotiating with Japan, negotiating with China,” Trump said during a Tuesday speech in Dubuque before folding his hands over his middle.
“When these people walk in the room, they don’t say, ‘Oh, hello! How’s the weather? It’s so beautiful outside. Isn’t it lovely? How are the Yankees doing? Oh they’re doing wonderful. Great,” Trump continued.
He put on an exaggerated scowl.
“They say, ‘We want deal!’” he bellowed.
The crowd rewarded him with laughter.
Trump did his stand-up routine the same day he took to Twitter to trash rival Jeb Bush for making a reference to Asians while discussing “anchor babies.” He should take a second job as a comedian. Seems like it's working out for him.
Aside from the stupidity, his comment leads me to believe he doesn't really make his business decisions for his companies. What he described is literally the opposite of how business meetings work with Chinese and Japanese companies. Whether it's email or in person, you always start with small talk about the weather, and with the Japanese baseball usually comes up. Diving right in is an easy way to annoy them.
Meetings with Americans and some Europeans take place like he described, but not Chinese/Japanese.
I bring it up because I assume most people here don't have experience with the stuff, to know just how much he's talking out of his ass (although you can usually assume it's quite a lot.)
|
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
well one could always wonder how does he have time for all his reality shows.
|
On August 27 2015 23:06 Jibba wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2015 22:50 JinDesu wrote:http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/donald-trump-mocks-asians-broken-english-speech-article-1.2338344? Republican presidential front-runner Donald Trump lampooned Asians during a campaign rally in Iowa, mocking them with broken English.
“Negotiating with Japan, negotiating with China,” Trump said during a Tuesday speech in Dubuque before folding his hands over his middle.
“When these people walk in the room, they don’t say, ‘Oh, hello! How’s the weather? It’s so beautiful outside. Isn’t it lovely? How are the Yankees doing? Oh they’re doing wonderful. Great,” Trump continued.
He put on an exaggerated scowl.
“They say, ‘We want deal!’” he bellowed.
The crowd rewarded him with laughter.
Trump did his stand-up routine the same day he took to Twitter to trash rival Jeb Bush for making a reference to Asians while discussing “anchor babies.” He should take a second job as a comedian. Seems like it's working out for him. Aside from the stupidity, his comment leads me to believe he doesn't really make his business decisions for his companies. What he described is literally the opposite of how business meetings work with Chinese and Japanese companies. Whether it's email or in person, you always start with small talk about the weather, and with the Japanese baseball usually comes up. Diving right in is an easy way to annoy them. Meetings with Americans and some Europeans take place like he described, but not Chinese/Japanese. I bring it up because I assume most people here don't have experience with the stuff, to know just how much he's talking out of his ass (although you can usually assume it's quite a lot.)
I don't think his goal with that speech was to educate Americans about how people actually do business. Trump is just picking the low hanging fruit as always. It is even possible he just wanted an excuse to use the accent lol.
|
His goal is to be racist on camera and then news agencies will pick it up and report he was racist on camera. The circle of life continues.
|
On August 27 2015 12:56 Wegandi wrote:Show nested quote +On August 27 2015 04:20 Kickstart wrote:
I find the thought process displayed by whatisthisasheep to be pretty disturbing whenever I come across it. To believe as he does you have to say "Blacks were enslaved for hundreds of years; then we freed them but they were not equal and didn't have many basic rights; then only about 50 years ago we desegregate but still a culture rife with racism prevails for quite some time; but now nothing is holding them down, racism is over, they aren't owed anything, and the only people holding them back are themselves". How oblivious to our nations history and its lasting impact can someone be.
I mean every aspect of the system was setup against them and there are still remnants of it today that are glaringly obvious. People talk about schooling, look at college loans. Lenders would 'redlist' entire zipcodes (so they could get around discriminating, because they are not lending to the entire area not individuals) that were low-income (read, largely poor black populations). This notion that nothing is holding them back is just silly and ignorant. Are there more opportunities now than before? Yes. But it is still unreasonable to pretend like everything is equal and the playing field is the same for everyone when it clearly isn't. 50 years ago isn't even that long ago, to expect everything to be equal when we haven't even been desegregated for that long just baffles me.
Anyways I could rant forever but if you don't get the point by now there's no helping you :D! So, are the lenders greedy or racist, because they can't be both as they are mutually exclusive in practice. Blacks and other minorities have large institutional and governmental advantages today, so the argument that slavery or Jim Crow is responsible for the socioeconomic conditions 150 or 50 years later is asinine. Asian's were as discriminated against, and yet, today they are by far blowing away every other identity group in terms of socioeconomic success in this country. It's obvious that there are problems in communities other than 'racism', but you can't bring yourself to admit any fault in any victim-identity group that could be holding themselves back. It's always whites, or males to you guys. Just for the record it's been longer than 50 years now, and that is plenty of time as that is nearly 2 generations. We should have seen some progress by now, but blacks now aren't even better off in terms of socioeconomics than they were in the 1960s. Of course, there are a myriad of reasons for this not the least of which include; Drug War and increasing amount of laws that disproportionally effect the poor (more laws, and money meaning more in today's "Justice" system), their culture that has seen the family unit destroyed, education being not nearly as important as in other parts of our society, etc. Go ahead and rant forever though. Perhaps black communities should look towards Asians to see how to improve themselves.
Just because the major racist laws and policies disappeared 50 years ago as you say doesn't mean that everything was equal the very next day. 1954 Brown V Board declared that separate was inherently unequal. 14 years later 1968 Green V New Kent County segregated school systems are mandated to actually fix the segregation. from this point till 1988 there was real quantifiable integration. Dozens of laws and supreme court decisions reinforced the need to have integrated schools regardless of geographic isolation. Children would be bussed to schools in neighboring districts to make sure that integration was actually happening. in 1988 almost 45% of black students in the US were attending majority white schools.
Just because it became legal for blacks and whites to be in the same school doesn't mean that there was all of a sudden a public desire to do so. White people left neighborhoods where the number of black students in the schools was deemed too high for them, and relocated to whiter neighborhoods. in 1991 in BOE of Oklahoma City V Dowell some of the progress starts to fall apart and mandated integration is no longer enforced. 1992 Freeman V Pitts integration can now happen in an "incremental fashion". 1995 formerly segragate school districts are no longer controlled by the federal gov. and return to local control. 2002 Harvard civil rights project concludes that schools are resegregating. 2007 voluntary school integration plans are now deemed unconstitutional by supreme court.
So we have maybe 10 years of real integration considering there were many counties fighting the supreme court decision for years after the original brown v board decision. and then a slow and steady regression back into de facto segregation. Real world segregation hasn't ended. When too many minorities move into a neighborhood white people start to leave, not all, but enough to make it a mostly minority neighborhood again.
http://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2015/04/where-the-white-people-live/390153/
http://www.tolerance.org/magazine/number-25-spring-2004/feature/brown-v-board-timeline-school-integration-us
There is now a time of increased desegregation among many neighborhoods likely fuelled by the successes of the forced integration of the 70s and 80s (my gut instinct I couldn't find any thing specific to prove it).
http://www.washingtonpost.com/local/census-the-new-us-neighborhood-defined-by-diversity-as-all-white-enclaves-vanish/2011/09/14/gIQA5QAuSM_story.html
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/nation/story/2011-12-06/segregation-kansas-city/51694850/1
Blacks' move to suburbia has accelerated in the past decade, shifting the racial make-up of urban and suburban neighborhoods across the nation. The change is particularly striking here because of the area's long history of racial segregation...
Whites, on the other hand, still rarely move in to minority neighborhoods except in some urban areas where development has launched a wave of gentrification. In most cases, whites leave neighborhoods as they get more diverse and move farther from central cities, especially in the Northeast and Midwest, Logan says.
But i think that is likely to fade away as the results of the decisions in the 90s begin to bear their fruits. I think the supreme court rolled back its control of schools too soon for minority culture and majority culture to become american culture, and alot of the people who missed the integration boat, whether too young or too old, were allowed to go back to their previous way of life where separate and equal was ok, even though it is completely unachievable.
|
On August 27 2015 18:04 Yoav wrote:
I find it really interesting that any argument about racism boils down to three camps:
A) Racism is real
B) Racism isn't real anymore
C) Fuck black people
It seems like the participants in the debate kinda settle the issue, no?
On August 27 2015 21:54 Plansix wrote:
Edit: Yoav's post is still making me chuckle. That was some top tier stuff and sums up the discussion of racism in this thread nicely.
Why thank you. Kinda wish it were short enough to reasonably put in my sig, so I wouldn't want to repost it the next time this rolls around.
|
On August 27 2015 18:04 Yoav wrote:
I find it really interesting that any argument about racism boils down to three camps:
A) Racism is real
B) Racism isn't real anymore
C) Fuck black people
It seems like the participants in the debate kinda settle the issue, no?
The question is never "is there racism" but "to what extent is the racism systemic and institutionalized."
I would argue that it's obviously at least somewhat institutionalized, but I think if you asked twelve people how institutionalized it is you'd get twelve different answers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
