Why should young blacks be expected to work to meet educational standards, or even behavioral standards, if they believe the message that all their problems are caused by whites, that the deck is stacked against them? That is ultimately a message of hopelessness, however much audacity it may have.
Professor X wrote:
How simplistic. I was raised being told flat out that the cards were stacked against me so that was why I had to work harder. People should lie to their children? Granted, there are far less obstacles for a kid born right now than one born in the 70’s, but because of that, the age of the individual needs to be taken into consideration. I probably would be less likely to have that same discussion with my kids on that same level because of progression in society.
Either way, the fact still stands that many have been raised with the knowledge that they will be degraded for their skin color and to claim that this is what is holding black Americans back is ludicrous. Society did a fine enough job on that all by itself.[/quote]
Isn’t that his whole point? That all of this talk is poisoning the well, so to speak - that young people of today are having their perceptions unnecessarily warped by old people with left-over resentments to the real hardships they endured in the past? Wouldn’t it be lying to those kids to tell them that White America™ has rigged the game for them to fail, while using those examples from the past as evidence (not to mention using ridiculous conspiracy theories that are complete lies as evidence)?
That he’s wrong. Why would his race matter in this instance?
Oh, right…we are all supposed to think the same.
You said:
I probably would be less likely to have that same discussion with my kids on that same level because of progression in society.
Here we have a black man who lived through the kinds of discrimination you admit has been diminished with time, hence his experience is empirical rather than speculative - and just as you would be less likely to have the same discussion with your kids based on society’s “progression”, so does Sowell believe that Obama’s discussion isn’t accounting for current “progression”.
Exact same principle - Sowell is saying, “things aren’t like they used to be, I would know, and this is the wrong discussion right now”.
But, in your answer, I am reminded why I don’t look to you for intelligent responses on issues of race.
I’ll seek out others for that. Thanks for the reminder.[/quote]
You brushed right over “on that same level” as if I just wrote words for no reason. While I would avoid dealing with race the way my parents did in intensity (considering what they dealt with at the time), there is no way I would raise a minority (any minority) in this country without full understanding of the prejudice they may run into. Again, the message would be that they need to work harder…a concept the gentlemen who wrote that blog apparently doesn’t think is possible. It would not be some avoidance of the topic completely.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
there is no way I would raise a minority (any minority) in this country without full understanding of the prejudice they may run into. Again, the message would be that they need to work harder… It would not be some avoidance of the topic completely.[/quote]
X ~ I completely agree with you that you should prepare your children for what they will face in this world. I have felt the eyes burning right through me when people find out I’m Catholic, and while it may seem less significant, it’s a prejudice that I will certainly teach my children about at an appropriate age. I just had a conversation with my 5 year old a few hours ago that we love everyone, no matter how different we are or what choices they make in their life. Just planting the seeds of knowledge and respect… I am my brother’s keeper.
[quote]jackzepplin wrote:
Professor X wrote:
there is no way I would raise a minority (any minority) in this country without full understanding of the prejudice they may run into. Again, the message would be that they need to work harder… It would not be some avoidance of the topic completely.
X ~ I completely agree with you that you should prepare your children for what they will face in this world. I have felt the eyes burning right through me when people find out I’m Catholic, and while it may seem less significant, it’s a prejudice that I will certainly teach my children about at an appropriate age. I just had a conversation with my 5 year old a few hours ago that we love everyone, no matter how different we are or what choices they make in their life. Just planting the seeds of knowledge and respect… I am my brother’s keeper.
In health,
J[/quote]
Man, I’m glad you posted. Sometimes it is like I am the only person posting who can even see things from the point of view of someone who has been discriminated against.
I guess I should start just posting links to blogs only of people who agree with me as “proof” that I’m right.
Any minority who would raise their kids as if there is no prejudice would be doing their child a huge disservice. That would be fine if discrimination had been eliminated or was such a small factor that the effect was insignificant, but that is not the case right now and anyone who thinks it is can’t possibly be able to see what goes on around them.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Man, I’m glad you posted. Sometimes it is like I am the only person posting who can even see things from the point of view of someone who has been discriminated against.
I guess I should start just posting links to blogs only of people who agree with me as “proof” that I’m right.
Any minority who would raise their kids as if there is no prejudice would be doing their child a huge disservice. That would be fine if discrimination had been eliminated or was such a small factor that the effect was insignificant, but that is not the case right now and anyone who thinks it is can’t possibly be able to see what goes on around them.[/quote]
Maybe if you weren’t so abrasive, people would talk with you logically instead of feeling they have to fight back against your aggressive rhetoric.
[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Man, I’m glad you posted. Sometimes it is like I am the only person posting who can even see things from the point of view of someone who has been discriminated against.
I guess I should start just posting links to blogs only of people who agree with me as “proof” that I’m right.
Any minority who would raise their kids as if there is no prejudice would be doing their child a huge disservice. That would be fine if discrimination had been eliminated or was such a small factor that the effect was insignificant, but that is not the case right now and anyone who thinks it is can’t possibly be able to see what goes on around them.
Maybe if you weren’t so abrasive, people would talk with you logically instead of feeling they have to fight bacck against you aggressive rhetoric.
Just a thought, it wouldn’t hurt to be polite.[/quote]
[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Aren’t all of you against political correctness?
And what group are you stereotyping me into?[/quote]
Does it matter? I do believe Thunderbolt has insulted me to some degree in every single post he has ever written to me…yet you didn’t reprimand him…just me. Why is that?
Mick28 is a raving lunatic yet your focus is on me being more polite. I wasn’t aware I had to fake my responses to be understood.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
Does it matter? I do believe Thunderbolt has insulted me to some degree in every single post he has ever written to me…yet you didn’t reprimand him…just me. Why is that?
Mick28 is a raving lunatic yet your focus is on me being more polite. I wasn’t aware I had to fake my responses to be understood.[/quote]
You’re avoiding my question. What group are you stereotyping me into?
[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
Does it matter? I do believe Thunderbolt has insulted me to some degree in every single post he has ever written to me…yet you didn’t reprimand him…just me. Why is that?
Mick28 is a raving lunatic yet your focus is on me being more polite. I wasn’t aware I had to fake my responses to be understood.
You’re avoiding my question. What group are you stereotyping me into?[/quote]
The group with everyone else who seems to misunderstand different cultures in this country. Now you answer why you singled me out.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
The group with everyone else who seems to misunderstand different cultures in this country. Now you answer why you singled me out.[/quote]
Well, I do not agree that I belong in the group with everyone else who seems to misunderstand different cultures in this country, but I do appreciate you answering my question.
And to answer yours, I singled you out, because as I spend most of my time on this website reading others thoughts, I see that I agree with your premise the majority of the time. However, I do not agree with your presentation of you argument.
I feel, and granted this is just my opininion, that if you truly want others to see your point of view, and educate them on another side of an issue that they may have not realized, there is certainly a better way of doing it.
Now I’m not saying you have to go around and be a pussy holding everyone’s hands, but I think you opinion, which man times I agree with, would come across more clearly if you did not talk down to the other posters as much.
[quote]SouthernGypsy wrote:
Professor X wrote:
The group with everyone else who seems to misunderstand different cultures in this country. Now you answer why you singled me out.
Well, I do not agree that I belong in the group with everyone else who seems to misunderstand different cultures in this country, but I do appreciate you answering my question.
And to answer yours, I singled you out, because as I spend most of my time on this website reading others thoughts, I see that I agree with your premise the majority of the time. However, I do not agree with your presentation of you argument.
I feel, and granted this is just my opininion, that if you truly want others to see your point of view, and educate them on another side of an issue that they may have not realized, there is certainly a better way of doing it.
Now I’m not saying you have to go around and be a pussy holding everyone’s hands, but I think you opinion, which man times I agree with, would come across more clearly if you did not talk down to the other posters as much.[/quote]
I won’t be changing my approach. Not only is it exactly how I feel and pretty much what I would say to most people face to face, that same style of writing is also what seems to wake more people up to my view point even if they feel “abused” at first. I get way too many pm’s from people claiming they took me the wrong way initially but appreciate it now to think otherwise.
I posted this link in another bodybuilding thread. I am only posting here because Haney goes into a freedom march he went to right in the middle of that video. That was in the 80’s so this wasn’t exactly so long ago for us.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
I won’t be changing my approach. Not only is it exactly how I feel and pretty much what I would say to most people face to face, that same style of writing is also what seems to wake more people up to my view point even if they feel “abused” at first. I get way too many pm’s from people claiming they took me the wrong way initially but appreciate it now to think otherwise.
I posted this link in another bodybuilding thread. I am only posting here because Haney goes into a freedom march he went to right in the middle of that video. That was in the 80’s so this wasn’t exactly so long ago for us.
[/quote]
Lee Haney is a badass.
Here is a passage from Hagakure. I’m not sure if you’re familiar with it. It’s a book that Japanese retainers used as a guide years ago:
To give a person one’s opinion and correct his faults is an important thing. It is compassionate and comes first in matters of service. But the way of doing this is extremely difficult. To discover the good and bad points of a person is an easy thing, and to give an opinion concerning them is easy, too. For the most part, people think that they are being kind by saying the things that others find distasteful or difficult to say. But if it is not received well, they think that there is nothing more to be done. This is completely worthless. It is the same as brining shame to a person by slandering him. It is nothing more than getting it off one’s chest.
To give a person an opinion one must first judge well whether that person is of the disposition to receive it or not. One must become close with him and make sure that he continually trusts one’s word. Approaching subjects that are dear to him, seek the best way to speak and to be well understood. Judge the occasion, and determine whether it is better by letter or at the time of leave-taking. Praise his good points and use every device to encourage him, perhaps by talking about one’s own faults without touching on his, but so that they will occur to him. Have him receive this in the way that a man would drink water when his throat is dry, and it will be an opinion that will correct faults.
This is extremely difficult. If a person s fault is a habit of some years prior, by and large it won’t be remedied. I have had this experience myself. To be intimate with alt one’s comrades, correcting each other’s faults, and being of one mind to be of use to the master is the great compassion of a retainer. By bringing shame to a person, bow could one expect to make him a better man?
With that said, I’m going to bed. It’s after 2 in the morning here. All the best to you Professor.
I won’t be changing my approach. Not only is it exactly how I feel and pretty much what I would say to most people face to face, that same style of writing is also what seems to wake more people up to my view point even if they feel “abused” at first. I get way too many pm’s from people claiming they took me the wrong way initially but appreciate it now to think otherwise.[/quote]
I see. You revel in your approach - blunt, unforgiving, and even “abusive” a times, but you won’t sacrifice any of that for your honest presentation of opinion.
But should someone else take that approach, you complain about being “insulted”.
If it is so important, then why don’t we immediately start full investigations of ALL social connections to ALL of the candidates, scour their ministers comments, their friends comments etc, and splice them into 1 minute youtube clips.
The most important aspect of the Rev. comments (the 3 minutes of them out how many total preaching minutes) is the enormous distinction between his seeming hopelessness and Obama’s hopefulness.
Also, if he was such a huge influence on Obama, then let’s see the footage (which presumably will be 20 years minus 3 minutes long) of the inspirational sermons he’s given, the uplifting stuff that one would assume HAS inspired Obama.
I’ll re-post this here, since it’s been about 8 pages since I last posted it:
Ross Douthat has a good post that’s very on-topic:
Does anyone believe a long association with Jerry Falwell's church would have done anything but help McCain in the Republican primary, and gotten Democrats tagged as anti-religion when they tried to point out Falwell's nuttiness in the general? It's fine to be a Christian extremist in America. It's fine to believe, and say publicly, that everyone who hasn't accepted Jesus Christ into their heart will roast in eternal hellfire, fine to believe that the homosexuals caused Hurricane Katrina and the feminists contributed to 9/11, fine to believe we must support Israel so the Jews can be largely annihilated in a war that will trigger the End Times, fine to believe we're in a holy battle with the barbaric hordes of Islam, fine to believe that we went to the Middle East to prove "our God is bigger than your God." What you can't believe is that blacks have suffered a long history of oppression in this country, that they're still face deep institutional discrimination, and that a country where 100 percent of the presidents have been rich white guys is actually run by rich white guys. More to the point, even if you do believe those things, you certainly can't be angry about it!
What horseshit. If John McCain were an evangelical Christian and a longstanding member of Jerry Falwell’s congregation, and if he had written a memoir describing, say, how he was
“born again” under Falwell’s influence, he would not be the Republican nominee today. With a great deal of luck, he might �?? might �?? have done as well in the primaries as Mike Huckabee did, and of course you may recall that Huck had all kinds of difficulties winning non-evangelical votes, faring particularly poorly among Catholics; you may recall, as well, that the press delighted in lobbing him questions about evolution and wives submitting to their husbands and all the rest of it, without any fear of being tagged as anti-religion. And of course Falwell’s brand of evangelical Christianity is considerably more controversial than Huckabee’s. And considerably more apocalyptic, one might add: Imagine, for instance, how McCain’s support of the surge, and his hawkishness more generally, would have been treated if he attended a church whose pastor’s foreign policy views are defined by a belief in the imminence of Armageddon ( http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=51180 ).
As to Ezra’s larger point, of course it’s “fine” to be a white Christian extremist in America; it’s also fine to be a black Christian extremist like Jeremiah Wright. This is a free country, after all. Nobody in the national media was parsing the Reverend Wright’s sermons before the 2008 campaign, and nobody would be parsing them today if he was just one minister among many supporting Barack Obama for President. I have no doubt that many, many Democratic politicians have put in an appearance at churches whose pastors share Wright’s outlandish political views without anyone kicking up a fuss, just as Republican politicians have long accepted the support of figures like Falwell without taking too much heat about it.
The distinction here, for the umpteenth time, is that Wright isn’t just Obama’s supporter; he’s his pastor, his friend, and his spiritual mentor, which makes him exactly the kind of person whose views ought to be of interest to a public that’s considering electing Barack Obama President of the United States. And as to the substance of those views, well, if Ezra really thinks that Wright’s sermons have sparked controversy because he broke a taboo against getting angry over the fact that “blacks have suffered a long history of oppression in this country” and “still face deep institutional discrimination,” I would suggest that he take another look at them, paying particular attention to Wright’s remarks about 9/11, as well as what appears to be his suggestion that the U.S. government created not only the crack epidemic, but the AIDS epidemic as well.
What about you 100m? I’m glad to note you’d have no problem if McCain had been a member of Jerry Fallwell’s or Pat Robertson’s church for 20 years, had described Fallwell or Robertson as a mentor and a political sounding board, etc.[/quote]
I am jumping in late on this one but wanted to comment anyway. The big difference here (besides the fact that he is Obama’s pastor) is that Wright is throwing out anti-American sentiments.
What Falwell said about 9/11 was a theological point of view regarding God’s judgement for sin. For example, God allowed 9/11 to take place. It was an ill advised comment because it was purely speculation on his part because bad things happen to good people all the time. You can think he was nuts for his theological beliefs, but he never spouted anti-American statements. No one ever accused him of hating his country.
With everything that Wright has said it is obvious the man has deep issues with America. Hey, we have only fought to free over 1 billion people in the last 100 yrs - no big deal. By the way, who is keeping him here in America against his will???
I posted this link in another bodybuilding thread. I am only posting here because Haney goes into a freedom march he went to right in the middle of that video. That was in the 80’s so this wasn’t exactly so long ago for us.
[/quote]
Great Link. Thanks for posting.
He really came off as a class act in that video. Philosophical and very funny to. The pecking order thing was hilarious…
[quote]Professor X wrote:
jackzepplin wrote:
Professor X wrote:
there is no way I would raise a minority (any minority) in this country without full understanding of the prejudice they may run into. Again, the message would be that they need to work harder… It would not be some avoidance of the topic completely.
X ~ I completely agree with you that you should prepare your children for what they will face in this world. I have felt the eyes burning right through me when people find out I’m Catholic, and while it may seem less significant, it’s a prejudice that I will certainly teach my children about at an appropriate age. I just had a conversation with my 5 year old a few hours ago that we love everyone, no matter how different we are or what choices they make in their life. Just planting the seeds of knowledge and respect… I am my brother’s keeper.
In health,
J
Man, I’m glad you posted. Sometimes it is like I am the only person posting who can even see things from the point of view of someone who has been discriminated against.
I guess I should start just posting links to blogs only of people who agree with me as “proof” that I’m right.
Any minority who would raise their kids as if there is no prejudice would be doing their child a huge disservice. That would be fine if discrimination had been eliminated or was such a small factor that the effect was insignificant, but that is not the case right now and anyone who thinks it is can’t possibly be able to see what goes on around them.[/quote]
Unfortunately, I don’t think discrimination will ever go away. It’s part of world culture. It may shift away from one group to another, but it will always exist in some form. I would joke with an ol’ roommate of mine (he is black) that I grew up without racism because there were no African-American, Hispanic, Asian, etc… in the little farming community I grew up in. Then, I realized that there were prejudices against Catholics and that many of the Catholics had prejudices against the Baptists and so on.
There will always be prejudices, whether we like it or not, and it is our obligation to do our part in shaping our own thoughts of acceptance and passing that on to our children.
For everyone else, Professor X has been a bit abrasive for as long as I’ve seen him posting on this website, but I’ve managed to agree with him in principle from time to time. Also, I’ve had my time where I became abrasive from pure frustration with the lack of common sense and civil behavior.
On a side note; in my hometown community, a black family did move into town. Everyone treated the family with open arms and the utmost respect. They weren’t Catholic though. (grin)
I won’t be changing my approach. Not only is it exactly how I feel and pretty much what I would say to most people face to face, that same style of writing is also what seems to wake more people up to my view point even if they feel “abused” at first. I get way too many pm’s from people claiming they took me the wrong way initially but appreciate it now to think otherwise.
I see. You revel in your approach - blunt, unforgiving, and even “abusive” a times, but you won’t sacrifice any of that for your honest presentation of opinion.
But should someone else take that approach, you complain about being “insulted”.
[/quote]
Actually, when have I complained other than to ask why someone would question me on it but not you?
[i]- Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor emeritus of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago where Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) has been a member for two decades, slurred Italians in a piece published in the most recent issue of Trumpet Newsmagazine.
“(Jesus’) enemies had their opinion about Him,” Wright wrote in a eulogy of the late scholar Asa Hilliard in the November/December 2007 issue. “The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.”
Wright continued, "From the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ birth (in a barn in a township that was under the Apartheid Roman government that said his daddy had to be in), up to and including the circumstances surrounding Jesus’ death on a cross, a Roman cross, public lynching Italian style. …
“He refused to be defined by others and Dr. Asa Hilliard also refused to be defined by others. The government runs everything from the White House to the schoolhouse, from the Capitol to the Klan, white supremacy is clearly in charge, but Asa, like Jesus, refused to be defined by an oppressive government because Asa got his identity from an Omnipotent God.”[/i]
That is exactly the same kind of focus on ethnicity the Christian Identity types use regarding the persecution and crucifixion of Christ, but in reverse. “…public lynching Italian style…”