And when you say, “Africans weren’t kidnapped and shipped to the new world because people hated black people,” all I can say it wasn’t because they loved them either. [/quote]
In the case of the African slaves in America, which is what I was talking about, it was a superiority of muskets and a fucking Navy that kicked the ass of small little warring tribes still using weaponry decades if not more behind the Europeans.
Keep reading. Because I bet racism or “minority bashing” was more born out of social and political convenience more often than not.
Ruler says: Hey, they have resources and wealth I want
General: Sir, the people are weary from all the warring, the soldiers have low moral, we will lose.
Ruler: Their skin is a different color, and they pray to the wrong god, it is our duty to wipe them from the Earth’s surface
General: that will rile the troops
Correct. Their military might, and will to garner economic windfalls gave them the opportunity to sell these people they conquered. They choose the immoral act and accumulation of wealth that came from it.
Nothing more, nothing less. Like you said it isn’t like they sat around and said, “Jeez I really don’t like those guys, I wish there was some way to really ruin their lives. I’m tired of just hacking them up with my axe, and raping and pillaging their women. OOOOHHHH, I know, I can capture them and sell them as slaves, because I really don’t like their skin tone.”
[quote]eremesu wrote:
holy shit. for some reason this is not a hate crime. i wonder what that reason is[/quote]
Cutting through all the wordy discussion.
This IS a hate crime. The victims were targeted for their ethnicity. There is no arguing this fact. No amount of political blabbering or whining changes the fact that this is clearly an act of violence motivated by hatred of the victims’ ethnicity and is therefore a hate crime.
The police/government do not recognize it as such. That does not change the fact that this was a hate crime.
Blacks were enslaved by whites/blacks are disadvantaged/whatever/shut the fuck up. Nothing in history, nothing about current socioeconomic differences between the black “group” and white “group” in any way excuse the acts of these individuals. They are clearly guilty of harbouring racist attitudes and are clearly violent offenders who have no place in civilized society without significant rehabilitation to cure them of their racist attitudes. They are racists and they committed a hate crime, end of story.
Anything else gives legitimacy to the use of collective guilt as a valid excuse, and if collective guilt is an excuse then you would have to agree that if a few whites got together and drove through this neighbourhood gunning down blacks, then that would be “okay” because the entire neighbourhood shares collective responsibility for the attack at the gas station.
So which one is it? Are individuals responsible to not be racist and not attack people based on ethnicity, or is collective guilt acceptable?[/quote]
What a great post. Nothing done in History should make this ok. Speaks very poorly about our society that we as a whole can’t come together and call out these idiots who truly are racist. That black man in the article was as racist as any other human being who has ever walked the planet. We should all be furious. We should all call this what it is. We should all try to fix/lock-up/rehab this very small element of society, no matter the color of the person, so the rest of us who don’t harbor these feelings can get along. I sure don’t feel the hatred for black people that he was for whites, and I know that the majority of black people don’t feel that hatred for me. So what’s the deal here? It’s absolutely crazy that we even try to look deeper than that for an answer to fixing racism.
I don’t really like Reagan. I think most Republicans who accuse democrats of worshipping Obama fail to realize they constantly swing on Reagan’s nuts and act like he magically solved all of our nation’s economic problems and single handedly brought down the iron curtain.
He wasn’t a bad president, he certainly played his cards rights but Christ is he overrated.
I am not an Obamatard for the record, I am an independent though I’ll admit I did vote for Obama twice.
[quote]USAWchamp wrote:
I don’t really like Reagan. I think most Republicans who accuse democrats of worshipping Obama fail to realize they constantly swing on Reagan’s nuts and act like he magically solved all of our nation’s economic problems and single handedly brought down the iron curtain.
He wasn’t a bad president, he certainly played his cards rights but Christ is he overrated.
I am not an Obamatard for the record, I am an independent though I’ll admit I did vote for Obama twice.[/quote]
Found you a hat for your hair.
[quote]USAWchamp wrote:
I don’t really like Reagan. I think most Republicans who accuse democrats of worshipping Obama fail to realize they constantly swing on Reagan’s nuts and act like he magically solved all of our nation’s economic problems and single handedly brought down the iron curtain.
He wasn’t a bad president, he certainly played his cards rights but Christ is he overrated.
I am not an Obamatard for the record, I am an independent though I’ll admit I did vote for Obama twice.[/quote]
Your mom was expelling you into this world during Reagan’s first term. With all the time you were spending on swing sets during the Reagan administration how did you work it into your schedule to assess how good a job he was doing?[/quote]
[quote]USAWchamp wrote:
I don’t really like Reagan. I think most Republicans who accuse democrats of worshipping Obama fail to realize they constantly swing on Reagan’s nuts and act like he magically solved all of our nation’s economic problems and single handedly brought down the iron curtain.
He wasn’t a bad president, he certainly played his cards rights but Christ is he overrated.
I am not an Obamatard for the record, I am an independent though I’ll admit I did vote for Obama twice.[/quote]
Your mom was expelling you into this world during Reagan’s first term. With all the time you were spending on swing sets during the Reagan administration how did you work it into your schedule to assess how good a job he was doing?[/quote]
You know, reading.
[/quote]
You were reading on the swing set? My hat’s off to you.
What reading materials did you enjoy most in your thirst for knowledge about Reagan?[/quote]
Well I guess that means every first year, republican, pseudo-intellectual, Ayn Rand worshipping poly-sci major who decided to become a Libertarian after playing Bioshock on the Xbox 360 needs to drop all criticism of the Clinton years since they were too young to remember.
I read Eyewitness to Power by David Gergen, a non-partisan presidential advisor to bother democratic and republican administrations. Reagan was similar to Bush as he had the tendency to just let his subordinates do all the work while giving as little insight as possible though Reagan wasn’t as ideological and more realist driven as demonstrated when he raised taxes, same with his successor.
