[quote]ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
The rest of them couldn’t deal with not being the majority in their neighborhood.
That reads like a sterotype! [/quote]
What is wrong with stereotypes, considering stereotyping is why we are still on this earth?!
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
That reads like a sterotype!
Whatever that is.[/quote]
You’re a doctor and you have a difficult time understanding the meaning of this…and many other posts.
Yea…Oooookay.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
That reads like a sterotype!
Whatever that is.
You’re a doctor and you have a difficult time understanding the meaning of this…and many other posts.
Yea…Oooookay.[/quote]
You spelled it wrong, you idiot.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
That reads like a sterotype!
Whatever that is.
You’re a doctor and you have a difficult time understanding the meaning of this…and many other posts.
Yea…Oooookay.
You spelled it wrong, you idiot.[/quote]
HA! That was funny.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped[/quote]
Ask and you shall receive.
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.[/quote]
[quote]ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either… [/quote]
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
There’s some talk about racial separatism and how this might solve a lot of social problems. Regarding this I have some questions: what about those of us who are the obvious product of two or more races? Which group should we separate to? Were our parents deviants? Are we society’s refuse?
JMB
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
That reads like a sterotype!
Whatever that is.
You’re a doctor and you have a difficult time understanding the meaning of this…and many other posts.
Yea…Oooookay.
You spelled it wrong, you idiot.[/quote]
You have fallen to the level of making fun of typos?
Add that to your traditional name calling tirades and you have plenty to be proud of …“doctor.”
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
[/quote]
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
[/quote]
So, I guess if I said that you are an insightful and intelligent person, I’m stereotyping because I know that ISN’T true but I said it anyway.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
[/quote]
That is not the definition of stereotyping. Stereotyping is saying a group of people is associated with one thing. Whether an individual in that group is associated with that thing or not is irrelevant because the statement assumes that all of them are.
[quote]JMB wrote:
There’s some talk about racial separatism and how this might solve a lot of social problems. Regarding this I have some questions: what about those of us who are the obvious product of two or more races? Which group should we separate to? Were our parents deviants? Are we society’s refuse?
JMB[/quote]
Personally, although I have written on not-so-pretty racial matters, I do not know if racial separatism will solve a lot of problems. I am not a physical anthropologist, historian, or sociologist. So, I am not skilled enough in order to make an effective suggestion.
Personally, despite my inflammatory, and what I see as REALISTIC, comments, I do like dealing with other races sometimes. It provides a “leavening” effect. Yet, however, from my observations and readings, wherever there is diversity, whether it be small-scale in school or large scale in a region such as the Balkans, there is conflict, hate, and sometimes death (eg: the Balkans).
Personally, being Jewish, I am the product of more than one race. Although Jews take pride in not mixing with non-Jews, we are in fact a mixed race, hence why you see white, asian, and sometimes black features in Jews. I do not think I, myself, am society’s refuse. I think mean people, low lifes, and criminals are society’s refuse.
I do not think that interracial couples are deviants.
If there were organized separatism on a large scale in a country such as this, then I guess mixed race people would be separated into a mixed race region. This is most likely NEVER going to happen anyway.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
[/quote]
In other words, you think you are cute and funny, but you really are just pathetic.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
[/quote]
Actually, a stereotype is more like a judgement you on a person or animal from the usual and reliable behavior of this person or animal’s kind. You can pre-judge someone and be wrong or you can pre-judge someone and be right in your prejudice.
When I walk through Hollis, Flatbush, Washington Heights, or Harlem (which I have done before, although not joyfully), is it not right for me to naturally assume a different posture, be less at ease mentally, more alert, more aware of my surroundings, and be ready to throw up my fists rather than be laid back and nearly half asleep in my own neighborhood. Personally, I do not think it is wrong and it did grow out of my stereotyping. It is perfectly normal to stereotype and in my view, necessary.
There is a reason why those feelings arise in myself and others when walking in these areas and we are not evil or “scared of what is different” or ill-meaning. It is a normal survival instinct that is in humans and other animals: stereotyping.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
[/quote]
Actually, a stereotype is more like a judgement you on a person or animal from the usual and reliable behavior of this person or animal’s kind. You can pre-judge someone and be wrong or you can pre-judge someone and be right in your prejudice.
When I walk through Hollis, Flatbush, Washington Heights, or Harlem (which I have done before, although not joyfully), is it not right for me to naturally assume a different posture, be less at ease mentally, more alert, more aware of my surroundings, and be ready to throw up my fists rather than be laid back and nearly half asleep in my own neighborhood. Personally, I do not think it is wrong and it did grow out of my stereotyping. It is perfectly normal to stereotype and in my view, necessary.
There is a reason why those feelings arise in myself and others when walking in these areas and we are not evil or “scared of what is different” or ill-meaning. It is a normal survival instinct that is in humans and other animals: stereotyping.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
ZEB wrote:
ALDurr wrote:
ZEB wrote:
Give me one instance where I have stereotyped
Ask and you shall receive.
ALDurr wrote:
Also, please dispense with the “conservative” and “liberal” labeling horseshit.
ZEB wrote:
Ha ha…if I were a liberal I wouldn’t want peoople throwing labels around either…
Stereotyping doesn’t have to be based on race.
That’s not stereotyping!
Stereotyping is when it ISN’T true but you think it or say it anyway.
That is not the definition of stereotyping. Stereotyping is saying a group of people is associated with one thing. Whether an individual in that group is associated with that thing or not is irrelevant because the statement assumes that all of them are. [/quote]
Stereotyping does not assume all of them are. It assumes MOST of them are.
Then by all of the definitions AlDurr is in fact stereotyping here:
And if I call him a closed minded T-Nation liberal I guess I’m stereotyping as well. No wait, if it’s true with every one of them then it’s not stereotyping.
Okay Al your turn.
[quote]ALDurr wrote:
Although he was probably being sarcastic, he has brought up a good point. I doubt that many of them would do this, even though there are many nice, affluent non-white neighborhoods in America. I doubt that they could handle it. In fact, the only one that I would believe could handle it is Rainjack. This is based on what he has said in the past about how he grew up. The rest of them couldn’t deal with not being the majority in their neighborhood.[/quote]
You’re full of shit. I live just south of the ATL and my neighborhood is over 50% percent black. Some of my best friends went to school where the enrollment was well over 50% black and hispanic. You should check yourself before you pass judgement on everyone else you POS, cause that shit cuts both ways…
[quote]doogie wrote:
vroom wrote:
Saying “your race did it too” does not change the following fact.
The term “white pride” does not have the same meaning as the term “black pride”.
Actually, it pretty much does. I know you and the Prof. don’t read, but you should check out “Black Rednecks and White Liberals” by Thomas Sowell. He writes, “Centuries before ‘black pride’ became a fashionable phrase, there was cracker pride–and it was very much the same kind of pride. It was not a pride in any particular achievement or set of behavioral standards or moral principles adhered to. It instead was instead a touchiness about anything that might be even remotely construed as a personal slight, much less an insult, combined with a willingness to erupt into violence over it.” It’s a great book. Here’s his own summary:
Black identity has become a hot item in the movies, on television, and in the schools and colleges. But few people are aware of how much of what passes as black identity today, including “black English,” has its roots in the history of those whites who were called “rednecks” and “crackers” centuries ago in Britain, before they ever crossed the Atlantic and settled in the South.
Saying “acrost” for “across” or “ax” for “ask” are today considered to be part of black English. But this way of talking was common centuries ago in those regions of Britain from which white Southerners came. They brought with them more than their own dialect. They brought a whole way of life that made antebellum white Southerners very different from white Northerners.
Violence was far more common in the South – and in those parts of Britain from which Southerners came. So was illegitimacy, lively music and dance, and a style of religious oratory marked by strident rhetoric, unbridled emotions, and flamboyant imagery. All of this would become part of the cultural legacy of blacks, who lived for centuries in the midst of the redneck culture of the South.
That culture was as notable for what it did not have as for what it had. It did not emphasize education, for example, or intellectual interests in general.
Illiteracy was far more common among whites in the antebellum South than among whites in the North, and of course the blacks held in bondage in the South were virtually all illiterate. On into the early 20th century, Southern whites scored lower on mental tests than whites in other parts of the country, as blacks continued to do.
Many aspects of Southern life that some observers have attributed to race or racism, or to slavery, were common to Southern blacks and whites alike – and were common in those parts of Britain from which Southern whites came, where there were no slaves and where most people had never seen anyone black.
Most Southern blacks and whites moved away from that redneck culture over the generations, as its consequences proved to be counterproductive or even disastrous. But it survives today among the poorest and least educated ghetto blacks.
This is a much bigger story than can fit into a newspaper column, which is why I wrote my latest book, “Black Rednecks and White Liberals.”
White liberals come into this story because, since the 1960s, they have been aiding and abetting a counterproductive ghetto lifestyle that is essentially a remnant of the redneck culture which handicapped Southern whites and blacks alike for generations.
Many among the intelligentsia portray the black redneck culture today as the only “authentic” black culture and even glamorize it. They denounce any criticism of the ghetto lifestyle or any attempt to change it.
Teachers are not supposed to correct black youngsters who speak “black English” and no one is supposed to be judgmental about the whole lifestyle of black rednecks. In that culture, belligerence is considered being manly and crudity is considered cool, while being civilized is regarded as “acting white.”
These are devastating, self-imposed handicaps that prevent many young ghetto blacks from getting a decent education or an opportunity to rise to higher levels.
Multiculturalism today celebrates all cultures but it is the poor who ultimately pay the price of that celebration in stunted development, missed opportunities and blighted lives.
No one today would dare to do what Northern missionaries did after the Civil War, set up schools for newly freed black children in the South with the explicit purpose of removing them from the redneck culture that was holding back both races there.
A wholly disproportionate number of future black leaders and pioneers in many fields came out of the relatively few and small enclaves of Northern culture deliberately planted in the post-Civil War South. What they did worked and what the multiculturalists are doing today repeatedly fails.
But results are no longer the test. The test is whether what you say makes you feel good as someone who is a “friend” of blacks. But friends like that can do more damage than enemies.
Here’s a review:
This is indeed a terriffic thesis documented with thousands of references, suggesting that the ‘culture’ in the South is responsible for the ghetto culture, not ‘racism’ alone. The reasons are due to how the Britains lived in the outskirts of England(the lawless regions) before moving into the antebellum South, carrying their anarchic, chaotic culture with them.
…The northern region itself used discrimination methods not just against black rednecks, but to white rednecks. He notes that racism in the north started when ghetto blacks moved up north, being that the whites and blacks both were uncomfortable with the redneck culture within their community. Racism hardly existed in the north until the migration of blacks from the South after the emancipation of the slaves. He also notes that there weren’t just white slaveholders. There were many black slave holders as well, notably in the southern regions of Louisiana.
…In his thesis regarding the history of slavery, he notes that it was the Western civilization itself that took a stand against slavery around the world, and spent a huge amount of time and effort in order to push this ideology to free slaves from South America into Africa and throughout the world. He specifically notes that Britian was the primary force behind this movement. The Arab region and Africa both ignored emancipation of their slaves and continued to drive the slavery racket, even under pressure from Western nations. He also brings to light the fact that America was the only country that uses the black/white-slavery issue as a political based on race, even though slavery wasn’t constrained to one race in other countries as well. Arabs enslaved Europeans, Asians enslaved other Asians. This happened throughout the world, and still does in some parts of Africa.
You ended by saying, “If you really want the world to eventually get over the past, don’t cast a blind eye towards such things, please.”
I’d say if you really what to world to eventually get over the past, people like you should educate yourself about what actually happened, rather than spewing your inaccurate liberal party-line crap.
When the KKK and/or other white supremist groups started using it to avoid being so blatent, it was coopted to mean something other than simple pride.
To claim otherwise is ignorance, whether willful or not.
The KKK can’t take over the phrase “white pride” any more than the Crips can own “black pride”. If you choose to associate “white pride” with the KKK, that speaks to your lack of character.
[/quote]
A very enjoyable read. Sowell is brilliant. Thanks for posting this.
[quote]ZEB wrote:
harris447 wrote:
He does this all the time, Irish. he says something which is obviously to be taken sarcastically, then when you call him on his petty little bullshit, he claims he was being serious.
Typical.
Well, I was, and am outraged. I don’t like the government murdering people, or taking away their rights simply because they don’t agree with the political stance that they have taken.
If you had an ounce of intelligence you would realize that I am NOT being sarcastic.
Then again I think it’s more about hate with you than intelligence. You are just a very bitter nasty guy and that colors every single thing you read!
[/quote]
Zeb,
The same things that make him hate so much will prevent him from following your reasoning. But it is fun watching you and Doogie shred these guys.
I have to admit that I was brainwashed by the liberal media. When I hear ‘hate-crime’, I think of white-on-black, or straight-on-gay. I didn’t realize that its mostly the other way, with regard to race especially.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
ZEB wrote:
harris447 wrote:
He does this all the time, Irish. he says something which is obviously to be taken sarcastically, then when you call him on his petty little bullshit, he claims he was being serious.
Typical.
Well, I was, and am outraged. I don’t like the government murdering people, or taking away their rights simply because they don’t agree with the political stance that they have taken.
If you had an ounce of intelligence you would realize that I am NOT being sarcastic.
Then again I think it’s more about hate with you than intelligence. You are just a very bitter nasty guy and that colors every single thing you read!
Zeb,
The same things that make him hate so much will prevent him from following your reasoning. But it is fun watching you and Doogie shred these guys.
I have to admit that I was brainwashed by the liberal media. When I hear ‘hate-crime’, I think of white-on-black, or straight-on-gay. I didn’t realize that its mostly the other way, with regard to race especially.
[/quote]
Shhh! You’re not supposed to say that!
It’s not politically correct…