Black and Republican?

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Well, let’s see. Given you quoted my statement, it would seem you were saying that my statement fulfilled your previous prediction - namely, that people would avoid the issues in order to point out that minorities can engage in projection of perceived group characteristics on to individuals. I was pointing out that it didn’t.

vroom wrote:
Oh, is THAT what I predicted? I think you have mangled it somewhat…[/quote]

This is what you wrote:

[quote]That’s not what anybody wants to discuss.

They would rather find a way to show how it works in reverse as well… once accomplished they can just point their fingers and brush off any concern.[/quote]

Pardon me for giving it more depth and nuance than it deserved.

You can nuance it all you like, but this is the key…

[quote]vroom wrote:
once accomplished they can just point their fingers and brush off any concern.

vroom wrote:
You can nuance it all you like, but this is the key…[/quote]

Yes, the key to why it wasn’t a prediction fulfilled by anything I’ve written thus far.

[quote]vroom wrote:
once accomplished they can just point their fingers and brush off any concern.

You can nuance it all you like, but this is the key…[/quote]

What is the key? What concern am I brushing off? Or is it a concern we (BB and myself) or we (white people) or we (white conservatives) are brushing off? Seriously, help me out here. What is being brushed and who is doing the brushing?

LOL. This is too funny!

[quote]vroom wrote:
LOL. This is too funny![/quote]

No, it isn’t.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
vroom wrote:
LOL. This is too funny!

No, it isn’t.[/quote]

You’re right – it’s more sad than funny. But probably for different reasons than both of you are thinking.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Professor X wrote:
vroom wrote:
LOL. This is too funny!

No, it isn’t.

You’re right – it’s more sad than funny. But probably for different reasons than both of you are thinking.[/quote]

I am a little amazed, however, that you can think your perception, or the perception of others who think such a way, blame Jesse Jackson for why you think Jesse Jackson speaks for most people in the black community. This became an issue because two names were thrown onto this forum for apparently no reason. It comes across like selective hearing. So far, the blame appears to be on “the media” and the men themselves. It just couldn’t be on the people who choose to spread this concept and the same hatred as well…while all the while blaming everyone but themselves for the problem. I mean, it is the media’s fault, right? When does the blame fall anywhere near you as well?

[quote]Professor X wrote:
vroom wrote:
LOL. This is too funny!

No, it isn’t.[/quote]

Yes it is, you’re just not getting it.

[quote]
vroom wrote:
LOL. This is too funny!

Professor X wrote:
No, it isn’t.

BostonBarrister wrote:
You’re right – it’s more sad than funny. But probably for different reasons than both of you are thinking.

Professor X wrote:
I am a little amazed, however, that you can think your perception, or the perception of others who think such a way, blame Jesse Jackson for why you think Jesse Jackson speaks for most people in the black community. [/quote]

No, I blame Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and anyone else who holds himself up as a spokesperson for the “black community.” What, exactly, do you think it is a spokesperson’s job to do?

And I blame the media, for essentially midwifing the process. They give those individuals a platform, and coverage, and treat them as if they do speak for the “black community.” They report their positions as the positions of the “black community.” So, yeah, I think they share some of the blame too.

And, of course, anyone who decides to believe that any individual black person believes the same as the average position of the “black community” (assuming, arguendo, that there is one), makes that logical error on his own. However, I don’t see how you can possibly deny that this error is much more likely because of what the press and the self-appointed spokespersons do.

I’m not exonerating anyone from his logical error – but you’re trying to whitewash any blame from the two other highly culpable groups.

And I’m also refusing to differentiate, morally or logically, between minority stereotyping of majority individuals and majority stereotyping of minority individuals. Logically and morally they are indistinguishable – and both incorrect. You may distinguish them based on their effect, but that is a function of demographics, not logic or morality.

[quote]
Professor X wrote:
This became an issue because two names were thrown onto this forum for apparently no reason. It comes across like selective hearing. So far, the blame appears to be on “the media” and the men themselves. It just couldn’t be on the people who choose to spread this concept and the same hatred as well…while all the while blaming everyone but themselves for the problem. I mean, it is the media’s fault, right? When does the blame fall anywhere near you as well?[/quote]

Please read the above again. It’s nothing new, but maybe another read will make it sink in.

As for falling near me: Maybe when I engage in assigning you or someone else a belief based solely on your group affiliation, or ascribing to you automatically the view of someone who claims to be your spokesperson. When does it fall near you?

Also, this became an issue because you, vroom and whoever else wanted to change the original subject were successful. The original subject, I remind you, was:

Why should blacks who are conservatives be treated worse, and subject to greater derision, based on their opinions, than conservatives generally? Talk about taking an action that enforces the view that black people can only hold one particular view…

This is totally separate from arguing about the policies – whether you agree or disagree with the policies in question isn’t the point. This question involves the criticism faced by certain individuals for even daring to be individuals and support different ideas for solving the problems they see, both in their community and in their country, than they are apparently “supposed to hold.”

[quote]doogie wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
doogie wrote:
Lorisco wrote:
Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:

Anyway, I’m not saying that there are not those individuals who generalize illogically (committing the classic “part to whole” logical fallacy). What I am saying is that it happens on both sides of the fence, and it’s equally illogical either way.

It no doubt happens on both sides of the fence, but only in terms of minorities do these negatives become representations of the entire race or culture instead of the mistakes of the individual. Never will you hear that Bush represents most or all white people. How many times in this thread has the attempt to link most or all blacks been made in relation to individuals?

The problem is that the media tends to give Farrakhan and other minority wackos too much attention as if they do represent the minority group they come from. The media does not appear to give White wackos like the clan leader a lot of airtime. So the perception is created that the minority racists represents the views of that race, when that is far from accurate.

It has nothing to do with race. If a klan leader could draw a crowd of over 600,000 he would get the same amount of attention as Farrakhan. In fact, he would probably get many timese the attention. There would be endless hand-wringing about how such a racist can draw a crowd like there.

Then why aren’t they worried about Farrakhan’s hate speeches and the crowds he draws?

Oh, maybe it is about race.[/quote]

Yes, race and political correctness. It is currently acceptable to be a black racists, or a minority racists, just not a white racists.

So we talk about a level playing field for all, but clearly certain behaviors are more acceptable from a minority race.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
Professor X wrote:
vroom wrote:
LOL. This is too funny!

No, it isn’t.

You’re right – it’s more sad than funny. But probably for different reasons than both of you are thinking.

I am a little amazed, however, that you can think your perception, or the perception of others who think such a way, blame Jesse Jackson for why you think Jesse Jackson speaks for most people in the black community. This became an issue because two names were thrown onto this forum for apparently no reason. It comes across like selective hearing. So far, the blame appears to be on “the media” and the men themselves. It just couldn’t be on the people who choose to spread this concept and the same hatred as well…while all the while blaming everyone but themselves for the problem. I mean, it is the media’s fault, right? When does the blame fall anywhere near you as well?[/quote]

Ok, so it is Farrakhan’s fault for being a psycho racist and the media’s fault for giving him airtime. It is also the fault of the people who go to hear him spout his hatred.

Feel better? Did I leave anyone out?

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
exonerating anyone from his logical error – but you’re trying to whitewash any blame from the two other highly culpable groups.[/quote]

No, I’m not. I am trying to get you to admit that the blame doesn’t just fall on “the media” or Jesse Jackson. Apparently, this is like pulling teeth. You are all too ready to point fingers at blacks, at black leaders, at the “liberal media”, but how is it it took this long to admit that the “buck” doesn’t stop there?

[quote]
As for falling near me: Maybe when I engage in assigning you or someone else a belief based solely on your group affiliation, or ascribing to you automatically the view of someone who claims to be your spokesperson. When does it fall near you?[/quote]

It would fall near me if I didn’t correct this misperception if presented to me. I did correct it. I also will say that you are not THE ONE who brought it up, but there sure was no effort to correct the poster who did until I made such an issue of it.

[quote]
Also, this became an issue because you, vroom and whoever else wanted to change the original subject were successful. The original subject, I remind you, was:

Why should blacks who are conservatives be treated worse, and subject to greater derision, based on their opinions, than conservatives generally? Talk about taking an action that enforces the view that black people can only hold one particular view…[/quote]

This was no attempt to change the subject. It is all related. Why is the “conservative” label or the “liberal” label used so freely? Wouldn’t much of this disappear across the board if people would quit labeling each other like this? Beyond that, it was explained to you that the label alone does not instigate any hatred. Al Durr tried explaining this before in another thread. Many of YOU assume that when we speak negatively about a black who is conservative that this means we don’t like black conservatives. This was further explained to you in relation to Powell vs Rice. Yet you missed this? Why did you miss it? It is plain as day in this thread.

Read above. You are making an assumption based on grouping the mantality of an entire race together and finding fault in that assumption. You again are part of the problem here…how many more pages before you understand that?

So, I guess nobody should ever do any speaking?

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
No, I blame Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and anyone else who holds himself up as a spokesperson for the “black community.” What, exactly, do you think it is a spokesperson’s job to do?

vroom wrote:
So, I guess nobody should ever do any speaking?[/quote]

Not on behalf of a whole group, and claim to represent their beliefs, unless they’ve been authorized – I don’t think anyone elected Al or Jesse as representatives… (heck, I don’t even think anyone elected them as pastors of any congregations…)

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
BostonBarrister wrote:
No, I blame Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and anyone else who holds himself up as a spokesperson for the “black community.” What, exactly, do you think it is a spokesperson’s job to do?

vroom wrote:
So, I guess nobody should ever do any speaking?

Not on behalf of a whole group, and claim to represent their beliefs, unless they’ve been authorized – I don’t think anyone elected Al or Jesse as representatives… (heck, I don’t even think anyone elected them as pastors of any congregations…)[/quote]

So tell me, how is it their opinion seems to mean anything at all to you?

Boston,

This is rank bullshit, and it stinks.

Are you not yourself speaking out against the lack of coverage of good stories in Iraq?

Who elected you spokeperson for the views of the American public? What gives you the right to talk about your feelings on the issue?

These people talk about issues they believe in, because they personally believe in them. It’s the same reason that people of any race speak out. No, they haven’t been elected as representatives… so why have they been granted that status?

That is a large part of the entire issue in this thread!

People who are interested in speaking in front of the media are always going to play up the size of the population they represent. Why should it be any different for these guys?

Do you think white supremists don’t claim to speak for an entire race? Of course they do! However, nobody gives such claims any credit. However, when a minority group has a speaker, suddenly they are “representative” of a race.

Holy shit, are you guys blind or what?

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
exonerating anyone from his logical error – but you’re trying to whitewash any blame from the two other highly culpable groups.

Professor X wrote:

No, I’m not. I am trying to get you to admit that the blame doesn’t just fall on “the media” or Jesse Jackson. Apparently, this is like pulling teeth. You are all too ready to point fingers at blacks, at black leaders, at the “liberal media”, but how is it it took this long to admit that the “buck” doesn’t stop there?[/quote]

How can you pull that fragment out, then claim that the other stuff that I wrote with it wasn’t there?

Here is the quote, with the paragraph that immediately preceded it:

[i]And, of course, anyone who decides to believe that any individual black person believes the same as the average position of the “black community” (assuming, arguendo, that there is one), makes that logical error on his own. However, I don’t see how you can possibly deny that this error is much more likely because of what the press and the self-appointed spokespersons do.

I’m not exonerating anyone from his logical error – but you’re trying to whitewash any blame from the two other highly culpable groups.[/i]

Where, pray tell, could you have possibly gotten the idea that I was “just blaming” the media and Jesse Jackson? How could you possibly have misread that?

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
As for falling near me: Maybe when I engage in assigning you or someone else a belief based solely on your group affiliation, or ascribing to you automatically the view of someone who claims to be your spokesperson. When does it fall near you?

Professor X wrote:
It would fall near me if I didn’t correct this misperception if presented to me. I did correct it. I also will say that you are not THE ONE who brought it up, but there sure was no effort to correct the poster who did until I made such an issue of it.[/quote]

I don’t believe you clarified this statement:

Because every black man who has lived long enough understands that white america sees us all as ONE, despite not agreeing with Farrakhan on all issues, I can see the greater good that can result if the message and the ideal behind an event meant to bring us together stands true.

But if you did clarify, I apologize for missing it.

That said, I don’t see how that statement is any less, or any more, of an attribution to a whole slew of white individuals of an “average” view you, and apparently every other black man that you speak for, discerned.

[quote]
BostonBarrister wrote:
Also, this became an issue because you, vroom and whoever else wanted to change the original subject were successful. The original subject, I remind you, was:

Why should blacks who are conservatives be treated worse, and subject to greater derision, based on their opinions, than conservatives generally? Talk about taking an action that enforces the view that black people can only hold one particular view…

Professor X wrote:
This was no attempt to change the subject. It is all related. Why is the “conservative” label or the “liberal” label used so freely? Wouldn’t much of this disappear across the board if people would quit labeling each other like this? [/quote]

Actually, they are quite useful labels when they’re used properly, just like other labels. Describing policies, or beliefs on particular issues, as “conservative” or “liberal” conveys useful information. People should go further than that, but, assuming the labels are accurate, it’s especially useful for people who don’t have the time and/or inclination to research each and every issue (i.e. the majority of people on the smaller issues).

But I do agree that in discussions it’s much better to deal with the particulars of the issues in question than try to label something.

However, that was not the point of the original question. Irrespecitve of whether you like labels, this is still the question at hand:

Why should blacks who are conservatives be treated worse, and subject to greater derision, based on their opinions, than conservatives generally? Talk about taking an action that enforces the view that black people can only hold one particular view…

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Beyond that, it was explained to you that the label alone does not instigate any hatred. Al Durr tried explaining this before in another thread.[/quote]

The point isn’t that the label instigates hatred – the point is that black individuals espousing certain views come in for harsher criticism, from both blacks and whites, than do whites holding the same views.

[quote]Professor X wrote:
Many of YOU assume that when we speak negatively about a black who is conservative that this means we don’t like black conservatives. This was further explained to you in relation to Powell vs Rice. Yet you missed this? Why did you miss it? It is plain as day in this thread.[/quote]

That distinction wasn’t apparent to me, other than that you like Powell - who happens to be less conservative - more than Rice.

In fact, here is what I wrote previously:

[i]This point isn’t skipped so much as vehemently disagreed with.

Amazingly, it’s only Republican or conservative blacks, in the political arena, that get labeled this way – whether you choose “forgetting where they came from,” or more pejorative terms. If they don’t have the same outlook on policies, they are labeled – it’s just an exetension of the labels given to white conservatives, with the added little flavor of “forgetting your roots,” or the worse stuff.[/i]

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
This is totally separate from arguing about the policies – whether you agree or disagree with the policies in question isn’t the point. This question involves the criticism faced by certain individuals for even daring to be individuals and support different ideas for solving the problems they see, both in their community and in their country, than they are apparently “supposed to hold.”

Professor X wrote:
Read above. You are making an assumption based on grouping the mantality of an entire race together and finding fault in that assumption. You again are part of the problem here…how many more pages before you understand that?[/quote]

No I’m not. I’m asking why I see black conservatives take more flak than I see white conservatives take? Read above.

[quote]

BostonBarrister wrote:
No, I blame Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and anyone else who holds himself up as a spokesperson for the “black community.” What, exactly, do you think it is a spokesperson’s job to do?

vroom wrote:
So, I guess nobody should ever do any speaking?

BostonBarrister wrote:
Not on behalf of a whole group, and claim to represent their beliefs, unless they’ve been authorized – I don’t think anyone elected Al or Jesse as representatives… (heck, I don’t even think anyone elected them as pastors of any congregations…)

Professor X wrote:
So tell me, how is it their opinion seems to mean anything at all to you?[/quote]

It doesn’t. Their actions do, but not their opinions.

[quote]BostonBarrister wrote:
Where, pray tell, could you have possibly gotten the idea that I was “just blaming” the media and Jesse Jackson? How could you possibly have misread that?[/quote]

I didn’t misread it. I am pointing out how long it took to squeeze and massage that out of you.

[quote]I don’t believe you clarified this statement:

Because every black man who has lived long enough understands that white america sees us all as ONE, despite not agreeing with Farrakhan on all issues, I can see the greater good that can result if the message and the ideal behind an event meant to bring us together stands true.

But if you did clarify, I apologize for missing it.

That said, I don’t see how that statement is any less, or any more, of an attribution to a whole slew of white individuals of an “average” view you, and apparently every other black man that you speak for, discerned.[/quote]

Dude, didn’t you just write that blacks don’t like black conservatives? Quit speaking for me if I am so wrong about how “white america” views blacks.

[quote]
Actually, they are quite useful labels when they’re used properly, just like other labels. Describing policies, or beliefs on particular issues, as “conservative” or “liberal” conveys useful information. People should go further than that, but, assuming the labels are accurate, it’s especially useful for people who don’t have the time and/or inclination to research each and every issue (i.e. the majority of people on the smaller issues).[/quote]

I disagree. I think the whole idea of being able to “vote Republican” is dumb as hell. If an individual doesn’t understand an issue enough to vote on it, they should be able to mark “n/a” and move the fuck on.

[quote]
But I do agree that in discussions it’s much better to deal with the particulars of the issues in question than try to label something.[/quote]

It is ALWAYS better. I refuse to believe there is ever a time that these labels are that necessary.

Again, you accuse an entire group of people of thinking a certain way. Why if I am so wrong about these generalizations? Quit telling me how I think.

What? They sure as hell do. Just look at Jesse Jackson.

What else needed to be stated? I had to profess undying love for Powell?

Well, gee, boss, that kind of goes along with the whole idea of being a freaking minority.

What you should be asking is what those black conservatives are SPECIFICALLY taking flack for. It isn’t just because they are black and conservative.