Rev. Wright Once Again Proves He is a Jackass

Off Topic Politics & World Issues
41

Gentlemen, we are dealing with a disorder. Because her racism has an effect or is expected to have an effect she considers desirable (true for all racists of course) and she thinks she is accomplishing “good” with it (probably true for all racists as well) and she views racism as a nasty word, therefore what she does, she refused to recognize as racism despite the fact that the first thing she has to know about how a person or group should be treated or how a situation should be evaluated is the skin color of those involved.

She is NOT going to change and she is not going to grasp what is plain as the nose of anyone’s face in front of her. She has adopted a belief system that is incompatible with fact or reason, and therefore fact or reason will accomplish nothing in discussion.

As for claims that she would do the same for other groups, I don’t believe she would do the same for white men regardless of it being demonstrated to her that in some fields they can be documented to be allowed less chance than others – work harder, have better test scores and so forth, and be last in line. Making it imaginary, such as about redheads, is a way of escaping that actually she has her groups that she likes race-based decisions to be made in favor of, and groups for which she not only objects to such but favors race-or-sex-based decisions against them.

Yeah, I would just love to see where she supported the redheads or some other white subgroup who refused to allow blacks to open a business so other whites of that subgroup could have the chance, or even preferred for there just to be no business at all than for a black to have that. Regardless of it being a fact that that white subgroup might be economically disadvantaged. She is not going to do this. Her claim that it isn’t all about skin color – she favors blacks doing such things but only blacks and perhaps other non-whites – is the purest bullshit. She makes her decisions on skin color. And considers it morally good to do so, and defends any such practice.

You’re not going to get anywhere with her, gentlemen.

42

I have seen examples where men are at a statistical disadvantage, and I have no problem with programs designed to specifically benefit men.
I honestly have no idea of a scenario where whites are at a disadvantage. Tell me what you have in mind.

43

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Here’s how. (Though I’m not sure you’ll agree.) We had a policy to encourage the development of black-owned businesses. This inevitably means that some development proposals by white business owners will be scrapped. Those who propose policies like that think it’s a good thing to do because blacks are underrepresented among business owners, and encouraging entrepreneurship would economically strengthen the local black community. I think the policies are a bad idea, because they’re a form of protectionism, and we wind up with fewer successful businesses in the neighborhood overall. But the motivation behind it is not racism (the innate superiority of one race over another) but rather the old liberal principle of justice as fairness. It aims to give a boost to a group (black entrepreneurs) that is experiencing some difficulty. i realize you guys don’t think that constitutes justice. Sometimes even I don’t. (I really think we’re nationally better off if businesses compete on an equal footing.) But the point is, it’s not based in any kind of bigotry, it’s a prioritarianism thing. If redheads were having economic difficulty on average, the same logic would imply encouraging redhead-owned businesses.[/quote]

Look at definition 2. I don’t understand how you can truly try to rationalize it not being racism. It is. And you sound ridiculous backtracking and trying to redefine the word.

There is a belief that based on race (not situation) some people deserve more help. That is ignorance and bigotry. I’ve explained over and over and over again exactly how it is the 100% textbook definition of the word.

You are essentially saying that because their intention is to help blacks, it isn’t racist, even though it does hurt whites. So if a social group wants to get together to promote white prosperity (even if they end up hurting blacks) that isn’t racist?

I’m waiting for the liberals to take action to set quotas for whites in the NBA. We are drastically underrepresented. OBVIOUSLY, opportunities for white men to make the NBA are unjustly limited.

44

[quote]AlisaV wrote:
I have seen examples where men are at a statistical disadvantage, and I have no problem with programs designed to specifically benefit men.
I honestly have no idea of a scenario where whites are at a disadvantage. Tell me what you have in mind.[/quote]

Have you read anything I’ve read on this thread?

45

Well, for example, when I was an aircraft mechanic, the guy I usually teamed up with on the job was on paper almost exactly like me. Same age, essentially the same experience, same school. On paper the only differences would be slightly in my favor. I had about 2 months more experience (slighly over a year, he was right at a year.) I graduated top of the class, he was midway. I enclosed excellent letters of recommendation from the director of my school and my instructors, he enclosed letters of recommendation from people having nothing to do with the aircraft business.

Either every single airline he applied to asked him for an interview – he thought so but wasn’t positive that some smaller carrier might not have – or nearly every one did. Not one airline that I applied to offered me an interview. He was promptly hired at United, which was a premium job in those days. I never did get hired by an airline. I only once ever earned an interview, and that was because it was a local interview where they interviewed anybody who walked in – you didn’t need an invitation.

Now, he was a good mechanic. But the very fact that he was overwhelmed with offers while I got none says that whites were at a disadvantage. And it is NOT that blacks are at any disadvantage in the aircraft mechanic business.

Or as another example, when I was in high school and it was time to take the PSAT, my father told me to check the form and say I was black. He said the family would swear up and down I had a black grandfather and there was no test for any such thing. I didn’t really care so I did it.

The deluge of scholarship offers I received after the test was simply stunning.

In my senior year when I took the SAT and indicated I was white, despite scoring equivalently (slightly better) I got no scholarship offers and far less brochures and so forth of any kind. Still quite a few, but nothing like the utter deluge when I was black.

These are merely personal experiences.

Consider the New Haven firefighters. You have not heard of that?

If you have never heard of reverse racism, then you have really blinded yourself. Something is going on: you don’t want to deal with this truth that you do not like, is the only explanation I can imagine for your actually, you say, not knowing of it.

46

To be honest, DoubleDuce, I’m ambivalent about affirmative action and what it accomplishes. On the one hand, in colleges it tends to pick out minority kids from affluent backgrounds, and African and Caribbean immigrants (who have statistically better academic outcomes than native African-Americans). It’s not a great proxy for socioeconomic status. On the other hand, the rich black kid or the Haitian kid still can’t get a cab, no matter how many books were in her childhood home. Race, taken by itself, still matters somewhat. But I am wary of quotas. There’s a tradeoff between equity and competitiveness.

I think it’s a tough question. Way back when we were talking about Wright, the issue was whether a black church does wrong by being emphatically pro-black (and pro-Africa) and somehow we’ve drifted into the realm of social engineering. I do make a distinction between what the government ought to compel, and what private individuals ought to encourage.

Do whites have it harder? Seriously, do you believe that? They do have better test scores. But it’s a bit disingenuous to say they’re “last in line” if that’s because of some affirmative action program that’s deliberately designed to give a boost to other groups. Are whites poorer than other races? Are they less educated? Are they underrepresented in the professions and in politics? Are they, in short, doing badly on the whole compared to other groups? If that’s your claim I’d really like to see it supported.

47

It would be simpler to just end this, since as I’ve pointed out, Alisa is NOT going to see this.

Alisa, you decide differently on people and what is fine for them to do, what should be done for them, etc based on their skin color.

You applaud yourself because you think it’s admirable how you do it.

That doesn’t change the fact that your method is racist and you defend racism. Just your brand of it, which you conveniently find A-OK in yourself and in others who practice. Essentially, to you, when blacks make their decisions on other people based on skin color favoring those of their own color, you find that just fine and oh most certainly not “racist,” and when you do the same sort of thing, because it’s in your politically-correct direction then of course it is okay and “not racist” though in fact it is based on nothing but treating people differently according to their race.

If you run into or are asked about a situation such as a government denying a person or group a permit to build a business because of the race of that person, first and pretty much only thing YOU need to know is, Well what were the skin colors on each side? Oh, it was those of this skin color denying those of that skin color because of their race. Very good then, it’s okay!! Not racist!

You yourself have to know the skin color before you can come to what you decide to be right, and that decision will be based on the skin colors. Oh, you perform your racism in the direction applauded by your friends and political fellow travelers, so to you it’s not “racism” but indeed it is your noble effort to, supposedly, avoid racism!

End of story. Your view will not change. I know it will not.

48

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
It would be simpler to just end this, since as I’ve pointed out, Alisa is NOT going to see this.

Alisa, you decide differently on people and what is fine for them to do, what should be done for them, etc based on their skin color.

You applaud yourself because you think it’s admirable how you do it.

That doesn’t change the fact that your method is racist and you defend racism. Just your brand of it, which you conveniently find A-OK in yourself and in others who practice. Essentially, to you, when blacks make their decisions on other people based on skin color favoring those of their own color, you find that just fine and oh most certainly not “racist,” and when you do the same sort of thing, because it’s in your politically-correct direction then of course it is okay and “not racist” though in fact it is based on nothing but treating people differently according to their race.

If you run into or are asked about a situation such as a government denying a person or group a permit to build a business because of the race of that person, first and pretty much only thing YOU need to know is, Well what were the skin colors on each side? Oh, it was those of this skin color denying those of that skin color because of their race. Very good then, it’s okay!! Not racist!

You yourself have to know the skin color before you can come to what you decide to be right, and that decision will be based on the skin colors. Oh, you perform your racism in the direction applauded by your friends and political fellow travelers, so to you it’s not “racism” but indeed it is your noble effort to, supposedly, avoid racism!

End of story. Your view will not change. I know it will not.[/quote]

Have you ever taken this test?

Try taking the first “IAT” (implicit association test) on race. It takes like 5 minutes.

Odds are, your results indicated that you have some degree of bias against black people. Now, your bias may not be a conscious one. But very, very often, the decisions we make are influenced by subconscious beliefs. You - and most people - are likely to treat black people comparatively poorly and make negative assumptions about them. Unless you’re making a deliberate effort to push stereotypes out of your mind, and I see no reason to believe that you do this, you will trust black people less, be less likely to pick them if you need to choose a person at random, and generally assume that they aren’t as smart as white people.

And do you see how this sort of implicit bias can be tremendously harmful to black people, and to society as a whole? People with stereotypically “black” names receive job interviews at a lower rate than people with “white” names and identical qualifications. The bias carries over to everyday life - due to culture-taught biases, blacks face systematic and almost inescapable prejudice, even if the people doing so wouldn’t consider themselves to be racist.

So what exactly is the problem with recognizing that one group faces a hardship that other groups do not, and that therefore members of that group are likely to have their performance affected in the negative relative to non-group members? Affirmative action, properly implemented, simply acknowledges this ugly but true fact, and attempts to redress it.

49

^hmmm same questions as the Facebook: “How Racist am I” quiz.

50

What if race doesn’t really exist? How could anyone be considered a racist?

What is wrong with some good, old fashioned discrimination? It is what made this country work for over 200 years and now look: Everyone has to be equal even though we never biologically can be. What a disillusionment equal opportunity has foisted on the people of this nation.

51

Alisa V, I think you and I would probably disagree on most everything. I certainly tend to lean to the right and my social views differ from yours. But I think you did a good job articulating your position…even though I don’t agree with any of it.

52

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:

Ever notice that the black power solute and the Nazi salute are strikingly similar?
[/quote]

You mean this Nazi salute?

53

hah. What is the back story on that picture?

54

The stiff-armed “sieg heil” salute was used in America thirty years before it was adopted by the fascists in Germany and Italy.

It’s how schoolchildren in the United States government schools were required to salute the flag until 1942, shortly after we declared war on Germany.

55

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
The stiff-armed “sieg heil” salute was used in America thirty years before it was adopted by the fascists in Germany and Italy.

It’s how schoolchildren in the United States government schools were required to salute the flag until 1942, shortly after we declared war on Germany.[/quote]

Hah!

Thatâ??s funny. Iâ??ve read books that make the assertion pre-war America was essentially fascist, but that is just too much of a coincidence.

56

[quote]DoubleDuce wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
The stiff-armed “sieg heil” salute was used in America thirty years before it was adopted by the fascists in Germany and Italy.

It’s how schoolchildren in the United States government schools were required to salute the flag until 1942, shortly after we declared war on Germany.

Hah!

Thatâ??s funny. Iâ??ve read books that make the assertion pre-war America was essentially fascist, but that is just too much of a coincidence.[/quote]

The salute children are forced to give the flag in a classroom is not what makes a government fascist.

If NK started using the “right hand over heart” as a salute to Dear Leader would we be considered a communist country?

57

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:
Varqanir wrote:
The stiff-armed “sieg heil” salute was used in America thirty years before it was adopted by the fascists in Germany and Italy.

It’s how schoolchildren in the United States government schools were required to salute the flag until 1942, shortly after we declared war on Germany.

Hah!

That�¢??s funny. I�¢??ve read books that make the assertion pre-war America was essentially fascist, but that is just too much of a coincidence.

The salute children are forced to give the flag in a classroom is not what makes a government fascist.

If NK started using the “right hand over heart” as a salute to Dear Leader would we be considered a communist country?[/quote]

No of course it doesnâ??t make it fascist, Itâ??s just a striking, humorous, coincidence. Hence the â??hahâ?? and such. I find it humorous much like my initial salute joke, Iâ??m sorry that you do not. My statements were in no way referencing a salute as qualification for a socio-economic model for the people saluting. I apologize for any misinterpretation of ironic humor expressed on a PWI forum.

Besides, your scenario is impossible, we all know Obama is not a fan of putting your hand over your heart as an expression of respect. (this too is a joke)

58

[quote]LIFTICVSMAXIMVS wrote:
If NK started using the “right hand over heart” as a salute to Dear Leader would we be considered a communist country?[/quote]

This is how North Koreans salute their Dear Leader these days: with angry grumblings and taciturn faces.

That may be how we salute our own Dear Leader before too long.

59

[quote]Varqanir wrote:
DoubleDuce wrote:

Ever notice that the black power solute and the Nazi salute are strikingly similar?

You mean this Nazi salute?[/quote]

That is the Roman salute-

They copied it from Roman statues and steles.

60

[quote]Bill Roberts wrote:
Gentlemen, we are dealing with a disorder. >>>[/quote]

What she’s doing is defining racism in exclusively negative terms. That is to say that racism is only such if it’s motivated by a denigration and or subjugation of one race to another. When the motivation is (allegedly anyway) simply to aid one race absent the hostility to the other, that is not racism. She calls this the “old liberal principle of justice as fairness”.

I’m willing to concede that in some instances it is the case that elevating one group is not accompanied by hatred for the other.

This is however semantic surgery and I reject that definition in favor of the one I gave earlier in this thread. Racism is a qualitative evaluation based on what anthropological group one is born into rather than who and what they are as an individual.