Printable View
No one denies that these things occurred, but that is not what is being disputed. The term "liberal" is neither good or bad, but the extent of the ideology is the issue. But the issue at hand is what is occurring now.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBenoit
No...it wouldn't, but I'm not going to try to argue that point with you.Quote:
Originally Posted by The Atheist
As usual, both sides here have a pretty good baseline point. The effects of America's (and I can only speak for us) historical race/sexism haven't all dissipated. They're still around causing problems. And many laws and social trends are helping to alleviate those historical wounds.
It's also true that the white man is everyone's *******. And some of the legal and social measures taken to fix the historical wounds seem pretty hypocritical because, well, they are.
Quick story: I was on a screening committee for an English professor position at my college. We ended up hiring a white woman, but one of the members of the committee said that she "tried like hell" to get "some color up here" (I work in a rural college). And later one of the uppity-ups said that next time we should hire a less-qualified minority and "teach him/her up" so that we can "get some more diversity".
I gulped. And kept my yap shut.
I'm not using my story here to justify the baloney of a liberal media conspiracy. . . .just that the pendulum of racial preferences ticks and tocks these days. Ticks and tocks.
I think "affirmative action" does a disservice to everybody, especially those it's meant to "help," but it's been overblown and misrepresented, as has this whole concept of "white male victimization." For the record, I think giving a hiring advantage or "extra points" to a minority/female is wrong, but I also think it's been overblown. I'll find stats and post them later.
Some institutions get wrapped around the axle about appearing diverse (for an example, see every college or university's promotional pamphlets...) and might try to purposely skew the numbers, but I don't know that it really makes a huge difference in the end if they get accepted because of the automatically negative attention they get.
I agree that "affirmative action" does a disservice to all concerned and is essentially institutionalized racism... the Orwellian terminology be damned. It is simply part of the misguided attempts by some to change the past, rather than focus on the present and the future. We get the same crap in education with the efforts to promote falsified history in the belief that this will change things. I'm not interested in seeking out documentation of the racism involved in "affirmative action" but yes it does exist. Recently there was the info released by a disgruntled college employee that documented the fact that prospective Asian students needed to score well above Black, Hispanic... and White students because the college felt there were far too many Asian students in comparison to their percentage within the overall population. In my own school district there have been repeated efforts to establish a quota where a set percentage of all construction contracts must be awarded to minority-owned businesses regardless of who makes the best bid or is the best qualified.
Having said this... I work in a school district that services students who are predominantly minority. Seeing the lives and the obstacles that these students face there is no way to suggest that racism is dead or that white America is losing... for there is no way these kids are "winning." There are any number of issues that come into play... from the memory of slavery, the lack of a supportive community and family, generational poverty exasperated by the Welfare state, drugs, alcohol, etc... One thing we all might do well to recognize is the psychology behind motivation. America has benefited more than is ever recognized from immigration (in spite of the stupidity of conservative efforts to curtail immigration). When one considers just what is entailed in abandoning one's homeland, language, customs, etc... and traveling to a new nation one recognizes the motivation that already exists with most immigrants. Thus it is not surprising that these same outsiders rapidly assimilate and move up in American society... often starting their own businesses... stressing the importance of education to the children. This is not the reality of Black Americans... most of whom trace their heritage to forced slavery followed by generations of institutionalized racism... Jim Crow laws... etc...
Again... I feel "affirmative action" is totally misguided... and only increases racial tensions and hatreds. What I do believe, however, is that the nation owes it to every child living in poverty... in the Black and Hispanic urban schools and in white Appalachia... to invest far more in education... in early childhood development, in after-school programs, in offering day-care to working parents, in giving students enrichment experiences (trips to the museums, zoos, colleges, etc...) than they currently do to assure every child has an equal opportunity.
What's the problem then? If there are just as many problems for each of them, no one is being discriminated against.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
"De white man is de mule uh de world"
Poor, poor white man... how badly you are oppressed. Will someone please stand up for your rights?
Just in case you didn't know. I suggest you follow the associated links where you will find plenty of other examples.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBenoit
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bRqLVjOuSWQ
What exactly is your point?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
Quote:
Originally Posted by Propter W.
You know full well what the point is but I will spell it out for you.
Examples of blacks killing whites. As opposed the the reverse shown in in the pictures submitted by DanielBenoit.
Inflammatory accounts of an isolated incident=not evidence. According to the 1999 FBI statistics on hate crimes, violence perpetrated by whites (1 in 45) against blacks was nearly 28 times more likely than violence perpetrated by blacks against whites (1 in 1254).
In 2008, the FBI found that not only were Hate Crimes as a whole on the rise (up 2% to 7,7.83), crimes against blacks increased 8% over the previous year to 2,876. Blacks were also the target of 72% of race-based crimes.*
Is the point that a heinous crime didn't get covered properly on the news? Yeah, what happened to those kids really sucks. But considering all involved were convicted (one sentenced to death, two to life in prison without parole, one to 18 years who was not involved in a lot of the crime and one to 53 years who gave evidence) and there was extensive coverage of it locally, I really don't think this is what you're looking for.*2
There was also no indication that the crime was racially motivated or anything other than violence for the sake of violence. It began as a carjacking. Assuming that a violent event occurred solely because the victims were white and the perpetrators were black is dangerous territory.
Does every murder need to be published on the national news? Hell no.
There are some really brutal crimes, targeted against people of all races, not just whites or blacks, that go unloved by the media. Some really bad crimes go down less than fifteen minutes from my house that never get covered outside of Worcester County or Massachusetts.
Heard of Alex F. Scesny? No? He was a serial killer active in my home county who raped and murdered several prostitutes. Pretty bad, but only covered locally.
You may have heard of Darlene Haynes, an 8 month pregnant woman who was murdered for the purpose of stealing her fetus (!!!), but coverage of that event on the national scale was also fairly light, mostly tabloid or small blurbs.
The point is, so many people get murdered for so many reasons things that are pretty bad get ignored because the news wants to focus on other things.
The idea that every single mass media outlet conspired to not cover something is ludicrous. It just got overlooked.
...And a completely different scenario. Daniel posted pictures of organized violence perpetrated against blacks by a large number of people (hell, a community) that was racially motivated. You posted a video of some fat guy complaining about two murders that were not necessarily racially motivated (see above) or perpetrated by a large, semi-organized mob.Quote:
Examples of blacks killing whites. As opposed the the reverse shown in in the pictures submitted by DanielBenoit.
*Personally, I don't like using the Hate Crimes Stats since the concept of a "hate" crime seems a little silly and a whole host of other reasons. But here, since it's showing an increasing trend compared to previous statistics, I'll use it.
*2:http://www.knoxnews.com/news/news/lo...ewsom-murders/
Anyway, I'm off to go watch some football (GO NAVY BEAT EVERYBODY).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
What you see in that picture are lynchings of black people. Thousands of black people (and white people who aided black people) were lynched. Punishment for those crimes was very unusual. Generally, the perpetrators were not even arrested. These crimes are mentioned in one breathe with Jim Crow laws and segregation. One reason why black people were being murdered was to dissuade them from voting.
How can you compare a random but extreme act of violence to that?
Black PanthersQuote:
Originally Posted by Propter W.
Yes, I can agree that the sins of the past were wrong. The point of this thread is that such things against the white male have begun. Do we have to have murders against whites occur before we do anything? Well, they have begun.
Hate Crimes
Hate Crimes
Black crimes against whites are not random acts of violence, they are well-documented for those who are interested. I can give you two examples from personal experience, so you can spare to me the bleeding heart stories about how hard done by they are or were. At least you live in a country where people can openly speak out against blacks attacking whites. FOR THE MOMENT!Quote:
Originally Posted by Propter W.
If you can show me the documentation that proves that these 'black crimes' are racially motivated and connected by a larger sentiment of black supremacy, please do.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
You don't know where I live, what I can say or what colour my skin has.
First I would like to direct everyone to Hurricanes wonderful post above, which pretty much would've been my reply to Mr. Brian Bean.
Oh thank God! A page of excellent rational points ala Hurricane, OrphanPip and SLG. I am not involved enough in the debate over affirmative action in order to take a standpoint, but I think that it is useful in pointing out that the policy was started by Kennedy in order to "take affirmative action to ensure that applicants are employed, and that employees are treated during employment, without regard to their race, creed, color, or national origin". This is what we want in the long run.Quote:
Originally Posted by stlukesguild
And thank you SLG for giving us your personal experience. I think it is quite hard for regular white Americans to truly understand the Hispanic or black American experience. Most just want to look away and judge from 100 miles away.
Michael Savage! Wonderful!Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
Just to establish his supreme legitimacy on this matter, I would love to give the folks some great quotes:
On Autism: "A fraud, a racket. ... I'll tell you what autism is. In 99 percent of the cases, it's a brat who hasn't been told to cut the act out. That's what autism is. What do you mean they scream and they're silent? They don't have a father around to tell them, 'Don't act like a moron. You'll get nowhere in life. Stop acting like a putz. Straighten up. Act like a man. Don't sit there crying and screaming, idiot.' "
On immigrants from Africa: "There's the new America for you. Bring them in by the millions. Bring in 10 million more from Africa. Bring them in with AIDS. Show how multicultural you are. They can't reason, but bring them in with a machete in their head. Go ahead. Bring them in with machetes in their mind."
On Muslims: "Oh, there's a billion of them." I said, "So, kill 100 million of them, then there'll be 900 million of them." I mean, would you rather die—would you rather us die than them?"
"I think these people need to be forcibly converted to Christianity.". . .."It's the only thing that can probably turn them into human beings."
On the Catholic Church: "The institution is rotten from the top to the bottom." [He also called Catholics "greedy pigs".]
On LGBT rights: "The children's minds are being raped by the homosexual mafia!"
It's also worth noting that our friend Michael has been banned from the U.K.
You know what. . .you're right! It's so weird how none of my black friends haven't ganged up on me yet, or how my mother hasn't been ganged up on after working for three years in a predominately black school. I'll have to call her and check up on her.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
As Hurricane said before, these are isolated incidents. Of course hate crimes occur against whites! Have you not been reading hate crime stats I've been providing you? The only problem is that hate crimes against blacks is significantly larger. Please go back to my other posts and once again examine the stats provided by the FBI.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Also, it's kinda weird, considering all of this discrimination against whites being on the rise that hate crimes against white folks has decreased significantly in the past 15 years.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hatecm.htm#bias
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/hc2008/data/table_01.html
hmmmm....not all black people are bad, and not all white people are either...that proves nothing.Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBenoit
That was in regards to a series of Brian's posts starting with this gem two pages back:Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
Quote:
Secondly, if you don't believe that blacks will gang up against a single white guy, you are in serious need of an some real education, as opposed to the liberal pap you, and countless others, have been fed for the last four or five decades. Rascism, Shmacism, grow up and get real. It's late and I'm going to bed now but I will deal firmly with any further liberal nonsense in the morning.
Btw, please check out my post above you which I finished editing after you posted yours.
Can you prove that they weren't, forget 'black supremacy' there is no such thing and never will be, it's merely a case of race hatred. I don't care where you live or whether you are black or white. As I mentioned above, I have had personal experience of an anti-white attack by blacks; as have many other white people in London and elsewhere in the UK as is regularly reported by the media. Moreover, as I have had cause to say previously on this forum, one ounce of personal experience is worth a ton of statistics.Quote:
Originally Posted by Propter W.
To return to the original post, I have read extracts from the book concerned and it conforms to what, unfortunately is happening in the UK as well as the USA; there is definitely government sponsored discrimination against whites.
If those who are the cause of this discrimination think that everyone is going to let them foist it onto the public without dissent, they had better think again.
Ummm, so every crime committed against whites by blacks will always be a case of race hatred?Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
So from a case in which you were unfortunately attacked by a black individual, you are going to judge the current state of an entire race?Quote:
I don't care where you live or whether you are black or white. As I mentioned above, I have had personal experience of an anti-white attack by blacks; as have many other white people in London and elsewhere in the UK as is regularly reported by the media.
Ha! No it's not. Statistics are thousands of collected and documented personal experiences. I could just as well argue that every black individual will be friendly to you, based on my own personal experience. Using 'personal experience' on the scale of judging the masses is ridiculous because you can't generalize numbers of people that range within the millions just based off of one or two experiences you've had.Quote:
Moreover, as I have had cause to say previously on this forum, one ounce of personal experience is worth a ton of statistics.
Please just provide me some evidence of this and I will be happy, if it is so "definitely" why is it that according to every single poll taken that unemployment for black Americans is higher than that of white folks, why is it that there are far far more cases of discrimination against blacks in the workplace than against whites (please see my previous posts for links that are from government websites and not youtube), why is it that there are still more than twice the amount of hate crimes committed against blacks than whites (again, I refer to my previous posts). Please please please explain this all to me. Is it some kind of government conspiracy in fixing these stats to be. . . ."anti-white"? Are all blacks in on it too in trying to carry out a full-fledged attack on the white race? What is going on, please explain.Quote:
To return to the original post, I have read extracts from the book concerned and it conforms to what, unfortunately is happening in the UK as well as the USA; there is definitely government sponsored discrimination against whites.
If those who are the cause of this discrimination think that everyone is going to let them foist it onto the public without dissent, they had better think again.
You compared the cases, you should be able to back up your claim, not me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
If you want to talk about personal experiences, I've got hundreds. I'm confronted with racism every week, if not more frequently. I can tell you that racism is very much alive among white people and black people alike. But racism is not exactly the issue here, although of course it is connected.
I'm not exactly a fan of affirmative action, but to speak out against it in the name of equality is absolutely absurd. The sole reason affirmative action exists is because of the glaring discrimination against black people (and other minorities) and women. Two wrongs don't make a right, I agree. But in my opinion, the focus should be on the wrong that has lead to the other wrong. You're doing it backwards and I'm not timid enough to not suggest that you're doing so out of negrophobia, racism or xenophobia.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DanielBenoit
There were in fact two instances and they seldom attack singly and, given the vast number of simliar reported cases, anyone might draw the conclusion that it is endemic among blacks
With reference to your second paragraph, I refer to my previous statement above.
I will gladly explain what is going on, although the USA's case is somewhat different from that of the UK in that the US was left with a huge black population after the Civil War whereas the UK needlessly and stupidly imported its own after 1945.
In both cases, however, it became necessary to assimilate them into the majority white population and this was achieved by a massive and extended programme of racial engineering that, as this thread all too vividly shows, continues to this day. It's simply that some of us know what is and has been going on while many seem to think that it just happened that way. However, while enforced racial integration may have been unavoidable in the case of the USA, that was not the case in the UK and it is hardly surprising that many people don't like it
You forgot to answer the following questions:Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
1) Why is it that according to every single poll taken that unemployment for black Americans is higher than that of white folks?
2) Why is it that there are far far more cases of discrimination against blacks in the workplace than against whites?
3) Why is it that there are still more than twice the amount of hate crimes committed against blacks than whites?
How much better would it be if we, the supposedly educated, resolved to stop wasting our time trying to show who is the hardest done by, but resolved instead to accept our differences, to enjoy the differences, and to try our best to live in harmony with each other, regardless of race, colour,creed, religion................. To embrace any cultural variations, rather than fruitlessly argue about them. Idealistic? No, not at all. It can be done, it has been......................
I have just read your introduction to this forum and I quote:Quote:
Originally Posted by Propter W.
"I like to argue, which is something that I want to change."
However, despite this admission, I will answer as follows:
1. Probably because blacks are less employable than others.
2. Is it discrimination or simply the answer to your first question coming into play?
3. Proportionality needs to be applied, in which case I would think it most unlikely.
I also noticed that you have reached the grand old age of 23, similar to those who have taken the same view on this thread. Perhaps a little more experience would not be amiss in assessing this particular subject. You might be interested to know that, at your age, I held similar views until the passage of time taught me otherwise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
1. When we look at the history of the US we see that first black people were considered less than human (that's even in the US Constitution) afterwards discrimination against black people and unequal treatment of black people was institutionalised (Jim Crow, segregation)... I think it's more probable that racism is still rampant in the US and elsewhere.
But even if blacks were less employable, one should ask why that's the case. The most probable answer is that all this racism, discrimination and inequality has lead to a poorer black population. Poverty and a lack of education are closely related, especially in the US where tuition fees are extremely high. So in order to get more 'employable' black people, it would only be fair to right the wrongs of the past one way to do this is affirmative action.
No, I'm not interested in what views you held when you were 23. I'm interested in your current views, which seem quite racist.
If being against the passing of discriminatory laws against whites is being racist, then I'm racist.
And as Dr. Johnson was wont to say...."there's an end on it."
Everyone has their own truth, which is and always will be, relative.
Agreed.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Oh swell, Brian, I suppose I should look forward to being an angry old bigot at your age. I grew up in working class neighbourhoods that were around 70/30 white and black, and the gangs have always been white in my neighbourhood. Biker gangs and Irish mafia were the criminal groups I grew up around, I never had anything to fear from black people. Clearly, since twice in your life black people were mean to you, then there is widespread systemic anti-white racism. Moreover, recourse to hearsay, like that of well known bigot Mike Savage, does little to convince me. I find it astounding, that you can claim anti-white racism is so widespread when I have not encountered it once in near 23 years, and I've been around a lot of black people.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
Hell, I've had first hand experience of anti-English sentiment from the French, numerous cases of homophobia, and general assholish behavior, but I have yet to be the victim of a racially motivated hate crime. Moreover, I've only ever been mugged once in my life, and that was by a ginger. I suppose that gives me reason to believe the gingers are out to get us brunets.
I call bull****, you either have evidence of claims you make or you don't. When you make a claim of mass anti-white discrimination, this is something that can be empirically examined, it should have an effect on employment, hate crimes, and other markers of racial strife.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
to quote Alan How:
facts do not speak for themselves, but it is the network of relations in which facts are embedded that produces explanatory significance and this is something different to statistical or empirical significance.
Which is different from taking an entirely nihilistic standpoint. Sometimes, empirical data is open to interpretation, but one should be able to reason why said interpretation is valid. Challenging an interpretation of data is different than denying the existence of the data, or contradicting the data outright.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Edit: Which is to say, just because there can be more than one reasonable viewpoint, does not mean all views are equally reasonable.
An endemic?! Really? It's so weird how every-singe white person I know has never been attacked, harassed or are even lacking of jobs because of blacks.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
Yeah racial integration, black people and white people living together, yeah that really sucks :rollseyes:Quote:
I will gladly explain what is going on, although the USA's case is somewhat different from that of the UK in that the US was left with a huge black population after the Civil War whereas the UK needlessly and stupidly imported its own after 1945.
In both cases, however, it became necessary to assimilate them into the majority white population and this was achieved by a massive and extended programme of racial engineering that, as this thread all too vividly shows, continues to this day. It's simply that some of us know what is and has been going on while many seem to think that it just happened that way. However, while enforced racial integration may have been unavoidable in the case of the USA, that was not the case in the UK and it is hardly surprising that many people don't like it
Yeah, so thinks every racist employer who turns down a perfectly competent black man. Give me evidence that as a whole, induviduals of African descent are lesser-qualified workers. Because historically and statistically, blacks are discriminated against because of the very views you hold.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
Thanks for finally admitting it at least.Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian Bean
Well said brother! :hurray:Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Exactly. In matter such as this, which can be examined within a closed empirical system on such a collective scale, there is indeed a true and a false.Quote:
I call bull****, you either have evidence of claims you make or you don't. When you make a claim of mass anti-white discrimination, this is something that can be empirically examined, it should have an effect on employment, hate crimes, and other markers of racial strife.
you certainly can study why empirical data has the interpretation it does -which only brings us back to relativity - sociologcial contexts, which is the really interesting study here. to apply empirical data as a black and white be all and end all is erroneous since as humans we are subjective and not objective and the subjectivity and contextuality of our social lives cannot be discounted as if we lived in a vacuum. we don't and never will.Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
So, I suppose that's a justification for credulity to any asinine idea?Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
Not the point, of course data has to be interpreted, but the interpretation must be defended, and to hold hearsay and circumstantial evidence as equivalent to empirical data is not justifiable.
There are numerous valid responses to the empirical data, you could argue that it is not accurate for X or Y reason, your argument may be valid or just conjecture. However, to simply say, "well I've personally experienced otherwise," is not a reliable reason to find the empirical data lacking.
To reiterate, just because there are possibly more than one reasonable way to view something does not make all views automatically reasonable.
Edit: In the typical postmodernist track, one would attempt to deconstruct the validity of any idea simply to present an asinine subjective politically driven view. On this I'm in agreement with most of the political right, postmodernism is bunk and always will be bunk.
I agree completely. But as I said, within closed systems of contextuality in which we can rely on by empirical or statistical data. Like Pip said; there may be relative interpretations to the data, but to deny the existence or validity of the data, or to just outright ignore it completely is contradictory to the logical context of the logical system that has been created (i.e. the logic of this thread's exchanging arguments).Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
And yes, I agree that humans are subjective (as any self-conscious creature is), which is why the validity of 'personal experience' is irrelevant on a large, almost global scale. Just because Brian had some bad experiences with blacks or because I've had some good ones, none of it is enough to account for the numbers which at least are able to form a systematic objectivity (that is, objectivity within the system we are arguing in, not some kind of naturalistic objectivity.) Social matters concern collectives of subjectivities, and these subjectivities can indeed be objectively measured.
:confused5:Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
Brian, I'm sorry that you are being personally attacked. It seems that the original poster was right. If you try to stand up and point out issues of injustice that you personally experience and see around you, you will most definitely be called names. It is a shame that one cannot speak their mind without being chastised.
Speak their mind? Apparently you missed the point that I was being deliberately inflammatory because of Brian's *******ish attempts to demean the opinions of others on the basis of their age.Quote:
Originally Posted by BienvenuJDC
I agree in principal - certainly about collectives but how or why should the micro accept the macro when it so contradicts their own truth? At the end of the day, quantitative and qualitative date do not equate to walking a mile in another man's shoes, which is what individuals care about and since we no longer operate under collective feudal systems but rather live an individualistic lifestyle where the onus of responsibility is dumped on each person rather than societal institutions, why would collective research have any real meaning?
Because wishing something were true doesn't make it so. How exactly would you propose we make reliable decisions on anything if all that mattered was the superstitions of individuals. Research should have meaning to anyone rational enough to realize that their personal experience is not necessarily universally valid, nor is human intuition a reliable way to gauge increasingly complex phenomena.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
It has real meaning because we are judging collectives of induviduals (in this case it is black people). The whole is nothing more than the parts co-existing and those parts will indeed contradict each other at times being so vast. This goes all the way to Godel's Incompleteness Theorem. The global society is indeed emerging as a single system, and there will be vast varieties of micro-subjectivities contradicting each other. Which is why it is important to understand the macro as a series of statistics constituting the millions, indeed billions of micro-subjectivities. People who consider their own subjectivity to outrule every single other one is indeed, especially in todays world, a feat of extreme arrogance.Quote:
Originally Posted by Delta40
The argument of this thread has been whether or not the white male is being more often discriminated and physically attacked. This has been proven to be completely untrue by the statistics I have provided twice. It has also been proven that blacks are still victim to hate crimes more than twice that of whites. Every instance in these percentages are not just a mere number, they are little yet highly significant capsules of personal experience.
Quote:
Originally Posted by OrphanPip
you can wish all you like if it will make you feel better and if your real life experience is nothing more than individual superstition, so be it. Other people don't feel that way about their personal truth, values and opinions because to do so is to discount the validity of the individual whose experience is in direct contradiction to statistical data. research should have meaning but it should never be definitive, which means that individuals who form conclusive opinions based on their own selective research (that which sits well with their own bias) are in danger of becoming entrenched in heir own dogma