9/18/2008 5:23:13 AM

You made several references to business situations in which racism would decrease profits and efficiency. I don't feel I misinterpreted those statements, given that I started out by saying you may well acknowledge that market forces don't have supremacy over everybody's actions, and wave the aberration off as relatively unimportant.

Quote :

"If reducing the prevalence and intensity of racism is your goal, you have to do it by changing attitudes."

I'm curious as to how our big-L Libertarian friends suggest attitudes be changed, unless it's through laws or market forces? I agree that laws by themselves can't change anybody's ideas, but they can at least change the environment. Civil Rights laws in the 1960s didn't magically turn a bunch of people into relative non-racists, but since then that proportion has increased dramatically.

I just worry that if you think it can't be done by laws or the market, the options get thin on the ground. As though you all expect a handful of individuals to become Johnny Appleseeds of tolerance, wandering about the country changing attitudes one on one.

9/18/2008 11:48:23 AM

Quote :

"I'm curious as to how our big-L Libertarian friends suggest attitudes be changed, unless it's through laws or market forces? I agree that laws by themselves can't change anybody's ideas, but they can at least change the environment. Civil Rights laws in the 1960s didn't magically turn a bunch of people into relative non-racists, but since then that proportion has increased dramatically."

Dude, did you even read what he said?

Quote :

"If reducing the prevalence and intensity of racism is your goal, you have to do it by changing attitudes. Government decrees can't make someone who hates you because of your race respect you, nor can market forces, that takes time, gentle persuasion and the effort entailed by being genuinely worthy of respect."

I know you want to make this yet another one of your "oh, Libertarians are so stupid" threads, but honestly. At least try reading what people are saying before assigning arguments and motives.

9/18/2008 11:57:10 AM

I read it, and that's why I'm curious about what "gentle persuasion" means in the Libertarian Lexicon.

As for "being genuinely worthy of respect"...well, now, that's a hell of a thing, isn't it? I'm glad that Megaloman has figured out the standards of behavior that set the markers for "genuinely worthy" and "objectively just plain ignant'," but most of us struggle a bit with such milestones of humanity.

So, to sum it up, we can work on fixing racism through gentle persuasion -- which cannot be done through the government or economics -- and by black people finally putting in the effort to become "worthy."

9/18/2008 12:16:19 PM

http://www.thewolfweb.com/message_topic.aspx?topic=536041&page=6

Perfect example of what I'm talking about with the bars/clubs thing. Apparently I'm a risk as I'll come back with my 10 or so black friends and make the club "ghetto" if I like the place. The number of people who completely agree with that assertion is saddening too.

9/18/2008 12:26:52 PM

Quote :

"As though you all expect a handful of individuals to become Johnny Appleseeds of tolerance."

Look, it's been done, freedom summer, Selma, the March on Washington. Did you just skip that chapter in the history books?

Institutionalized, legally mandated racism has been overturned. What you derisively call "Johnny Appleseeds" of tolerance had a large part to do with that.

The number of actual racists gets smaller each year and they are now a marginal, politically inconsequential group. Nobody takes the salisburyboys and steve9194s seriously anymore.

Now if it still chafes you that people maintain negative stereotypes or that there is still a large gap in income between Blacks and Whites, you're welcome to do more, as long as you don't try and get my money stolen by the Gov or try and do it by instituting racial quotas or violating freedom of association.

At bottom though, I can't lift black people up, you can't lift black people up, they have to lift themselves up, just like everyone else. If, for example, reparations were instituted, not only would it be a massive violation of the rights of white people who have never had anything to do with slavery and who have never profited from it, but the inequality would undoubtedly reassert itself within a few short years unless there was a major change in many black people's attitudes.

Poor black people are in the same situation as any other poor person. They will always be poor, no matter how much money they're given, so long as they maintain poor spending and lifestyle habits. Conversely, if they plan long term, forego instant gratification to save and invest, constantly look for ways to improve themselves and their marketability, then nobody can keep them poor for long, and this is exactly how many blacks have escaped poverty.

Seriously, no lie, when I used to deliver pizza the nicest houses I ever delivered to were usually owned by black people. If I got a delivery to a multi-million dollar home, two to one the people were black.

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 12:55 PM. Reason : ']

9/18/2008 12:48:11 PM

Quote :

"I refuse to feel guilt for "benefiting" from the racism of others when only a very few can really be said to have ever benefited from racism, and it certainly cannot be said that the "white race" has benefited from racism."

Don't confuse white privilege with white guilt. They're two different things. Accepting the former doesn't have to lead to the latter. You do, I hope, accept the notion of economic privilege. Rich folks have advantages. You can acknowledge this obvious fact without feeling bad about having more capital than people working at Wal-Mart.

Quote :

"Being white may be pretty sweet, but it would be much sweeter if our ancestors hadn't expended so much blood and treasure trying to keep the dark man down."

That's an interesting argument. I guess the privilege depends on your point of comparison. Whites have advantages over nonwhites in current American society. In that sense, we benefit from racism. I agree that if you instead compare us to some parallel universe in which America rejected racism early on, we're likely disadvantaged.

Quote :

"I just worry that if you think it can't be done by laws or the market, the options get thin on the ground."

Hey, no wonder you have no respect for anarchism. You think only the market and state matter! Allow me to gape in awe for moment. Excuse me if I'm pointing. You know, MLKJ and company didn't start with laws or market forces. The laws came as result of direct action and persuasion.

Quote :

"At bottom though, I can't lift black people up, you can't lift black people up, they have to lift themselves up, just like everyone else."

We whites can, however, oppose racism in ourselves, friends, and families.

9/18/2008 1:09:42 PM

Quote :

"You do, I hope, accept the notion of economic privilege. Rich folks have advantages."

Advantages yes. I wouldn't call it a "privilege" though cause they've generally earned it. It's theirs by right.

Advantages or not, however, individual character and temperament are much more important. If your parents are rich but you're a frivolous dilettante, you're not going to hang onto the family treasure for long. If your parents are poor but you're hardworking, exercise good judgment, have self-restraint and plan for the future, you won't long be poor.

9/18/2008 1:49:27 PM

people will make excuses for less fortunates to get votes until the end of time.

9/18/2008 1:53:38 PM

Quote :

"I wouldn't call it a "privilege" though cause they've generally earned it."

Oh really?

http://www.phenomenologycenter.org/course/rich.htm

Quote :

"Advantages or not, however, individual character and temperament are much more important."

I don't understand this. If I inherited a simple million right now, I'd be set for life. That's fifty grand a year even at a low rate of return. I'd never have to work. Ever. My character wouldn't matter one bit. I could spend half my investment income on drugs and shun productive activity like the plague. I'd still be physically comfortable.

9/18/2008 2:07:19 PM

Quote :

"Forbes celebrates bootstrappers, but its 400 are better represented by Jim Hightower's remark about George Bush, "He was born on thrid base and thought he hit a triple." (Steve "Flat Tax" Forbes can relate. The Forbes family is conspiciously abstent from the 400, but Fortune pegged inheritor Steve's personal wealth at $439 million in 1996, enough to make that year's cut.) "Born on Third Base," a new study by the Boston-based United for a Fair Economy, shows that a majority of the Forbes 400 inherited their way onto the list, inherited already substantial and profitable companies, or received key start-up capital from a family member. * 42 percent were born on home plate. These include older dynasties like the Rockefellers and du Ponts, and newer family fortunes from companies like Walmart and Gap. The Waltons of Wal-Mart are ranked nine through thirteen on the Forbes 400, with a combined $32 billion. Forbes thinks some of those born on home plate hit a home run. For example, it calls Philip Anschutz "self-made" even though he would have made the 400 cut just from the mineral wealth he inherited from his father. * At least 6 percent were born on third base. They inherited wealth in excess of $50 million or a large and prosperous company, and grew this initial fortune into Forbes 400 size. For example, Edward Johnson III inherited Fidelity from his father and led it the mutual fund world series. * At least 7 percent were born on second base. They inherited a medium-sized business or wealth of more than $1 million or received substantial start-up capital for a business from a family member. Examples include poultry tycoons Donald Tyson and Frank Perdue. * At least 14 percent were born on first base. For example, Bill Gates's parents were well-off professionals and he went to a private school where he and Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen began their exploration of computers. "

So if you make it rich you can't give your kids a head start? And if your kid can take a small fortune and turn it into a large one than I doubt he's the kind of person who would have failed at life without that inheritance.

Still, by my count this only adds up to 69%, so almost 1 in 3 on the Forbes 400 worked their way up from the very bottom. That's pretty impressive.

These are people like Andrew Beal #317 with $1.5 Billion

http://www.forbes.com/2007/09/19/richest-americans-forbes-lists-richlist07-cx_mm_0920rich_land.html

Quote :

"First job fixing used television sets; sold to low-income families. Bought New Jersey rental home at age 19. Founded what's now Beal Financial in 1988 to buy distressed assets from defunct S&Ls. Opened Beal Bank Nevada 2004. Today banks have $2 billion in shareholders' equity, on prowl for fire-sale assets."

Or JR Simplot, #89 with a net worth of $3.6 Billion

Quote :

"Idaho-raised potato king dropped out of 8th grade, left home after feuding with father. Sorted potatoes, raised hogs, saved up to buy first potato field; became millionaire by 30. Company developed innovative freezing process 1950s. Today provides a third of the french fries sold around the country."

9/18/2008 2:49:42 PM

suicide bombers and "freedom-fighers" are about to start appearing from the secular leftists.
when is the violence gonna start against white families that care for their children?
that's my only question. i know the hatred is brewing these days. it's only a matter of time fellas.

9/18/2008 2:54:48 PM

Quote :

"So if you make it rich you can't give your kids a head start?"

If you do, they've got, that's right, privilege. And not some minor, insignificant privilege, either. Currently, I have to think about how I'll get by now, next year, five years in the future, decades in the future. If I had a million bucks, none of that would be an issue. And I'm looking at this from the point of view of someone with considerable economic privilege already. I come from an upper middle class family. These family conditions shape who we are.

Quote :

"And if your kid can take a small fortune and turn it into a large one than I doubt he's the kind of person who would have failed at life without that inheritance."

So you're a capitalist, yet you're trying to rationalize capital as mostly irrelevant. That strikes me as odd. Look, capital kicks ass. First of all, many investing schemes require or reward large sums. Second of all, everyone has living expenses. You have to pay for yourself before you can invest anything. Because of these to factors alone, you would see a huge, huge difference between someone who started life with a million bucks and someone two started with nothing.

Just look at the difference between someone making $20,000 a year and someone making $40,000. We'll call our hypothetical humans Joe Tofu and Jack Meat. Each spends $15,000 on the basics. After the first year, this leaves Joe with $5,000, Jack with $25,000. Jack's higher sum allows him to get 7% return, while Joe only manage 6%.

So, at the end of the next year, Jack has $51,750, while Joe only has $10,300. We'll say Joe then manages to get the better return, so they're even. (Probably not a realistic assumption.) After nine more years, Jack's investments grow to $394,589.98, Joe's to a mere $78,826.07. Though Jack only makes twice as much as Joe per year, he ends up five times as wealthy. Jack's almost set for retirement, while Joe isn't even close.

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 3:12 PM. Reason : example]

9/18/2008 2:59:22 PM

Quote :

"If I had a million bucks, none of that would be an issue."

Unless you spent it, then it would be gone. If you're the kind of person who can invest a million dollars and has the self-discipline to keep their spending below their investment earnings when you can simply snap your fingers and have a cool million, then you're the kind of person who can make a million from scratch.

Quote :

"So you're a capitalist, yet you're trying to rationalize capital as mostly irrelevant."

Hold on now, I never said any such thing. I'm merely saying that capital stays in the hands that can put it to good use. If you have those hands, but no capital, you'll get some. If you have capital, but lack the ability to put it to good use, you'll lose it.

There are exceptions of course, mostly having to do with using the coercive power of government to acquire and maintain unearned capital, but generally, this is the case.

9/18/2008 3:16:59 PM

Quote :

"If you're the kind of person who can invest a million dollars and has the self-discipline to keep their spending below their investment earnings when you can simply snap your fingers and have a cool million, then you're the kind of person who can make a million from scratch."

I strongly suspect I could do the former, but seriously doubt I'll manage the latter. I don't really know why the abilities would innately linked. For me, limiting spending ain't difficult. I'm getting by on $500-600 a month right now. Making money, on the other hand, I find rather unpleasant. Why do you make this associate? One scenario involves never working, while the other involves busting ass.

Perhaps you consider investing more trouble than it actually is. I could put a million bucks in my goddamn ING saving accounts and get by on $20-30k per year. That would be a monumentally suboptimal thing to do, but I still wouldn't have to work. Hell, I'd be okay for forty to fifty years without any return. (Well, depending on inflation.)

9/18/2008 3:29:18 PM

Quote :

"I'm getting by on $500-600 a month right now."

It's no huge trick to get by on what you make, not matter how little that is. It's much less easy to get by on less than you make, no matter how much that is.

Its just about all I can do right now to set aside 10% of my earnings, and my income has gone up significantly more than 10% in the last couple of years. A lot of people don't even put away 10%.

Look at all these high earning investment bankers who have lost their jobs lately and gotten completely wiped out. These people earned a great deal, but a lot of them were still living paycheck to paycheck, in debt up to their eyeballs, now they have nothing.



[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 3:54 PM. Reason : ']

9/18/2008 3:49:00 PM

Quote :

"It's no huge trick to get by on what you make, not matter how little that is. It's much less easy to get by on less than you make, no matter how much that is. "

Truth. I used to support myself and my wife on a part time job paying a little more than $7 an hour. Now that I have steady full time employment, even though I know we survived like that (and relatively comfortably I should add) I can't even begin to imagine how I did it.

9/18/2008 5:30:07 PM

Quote :

"American society (and many other parts of the world), is geared toward valuing white skin over darker skin."

9/18/2008 5:42:09 PM

Quote :

"It's no huge trick to get by on what you make, not matter how little that is."

I've been doing it from savings, though. I haven't earned quite that much in the last month, pathetically enough, and I've only gotten one check so far. If I wanted to blow everything I had on wild rice and anime, I could do that. Instead, I'm trying to wring every bit of life I can out of the money.

Look, I'm willing to demonstrate both of my claims. Give me a million bucks and I'll live only on the return. Leave me be and I assure you I'll never become a millionaire.

9/18/2008 6:49:26 PM

Working Class and even many in the middle to professional class have trouble understanding the difference between Income and Wealth.

Any tax debate that does not differentiate between the two is useless. While I approve of Bush's tax cuts on Income; I do not necessarily agree with the extent he cut taxes on Wealth.

A Doctor who by nature of work makes a positive impact on the community helping people have better lives gets butt raped by the 33% tax bracket. Meanwhile Mr Trust Fund baby douche, whose father was in the Fortune 400, only pays a capital gains tax of 15% to sit on his ass, do coke every night, and whine that his chauffeur dinged the door to his Benz.

The optimal system in my opinion would be of a Flat Income tax. Than a mild progressive tax on capital gains. We do not want to discourage investment; but the fact remains that much of the taxes paid help stabilize and maintain the establishment which safeguards their Wealth

[Edited on September 18, 2008 at 7:00 PM. Reason : l]

9/18/2008 6:57:40 PM

We should do what Zimbabwe did. They solved their problem of white privilege and now the previously oppressed Africans are now all billionaires.

9/18/2008 8:56:55 PM

Quote :

"If you do, they've got, that's right, privilege. And not some minor, insignificant privilege, either."

You're right.


But that's not white privilege. I'm white, and don't share this privilege.

Isn't calling something "white privilege" when most white people never experience it either a bit inaccurate?

9/18/2008 9:03:49 PM

My argument about economic privilege with thread starter was something of a sidetrack. White privilege would be distinct from economic privilege, though plenty of us have some of both.

9/18/2008 9:14:46 PM

Let's see, "white privilege" is the privilege of having money withheld from your paycheck so that unwed non-white mothers can get foodstamps and medicaid. "White priviliege" is the privilege of being bound by law to financially support departments of something studies and critical something at public universities which teach that white people are evil and responsible for everything bad in the world. "White privilege" is the privilege of having to constantly walk on eggshells lest you offend some minority asshole who probably deserves to be offended. "White privilege" is the privilege to not get a job or not get accepted into college to make room for someone who's main qualification is that they're going to fill out some quota. "White privilege" is the privilege of constantly having people tell you that you owe them reparations for some shit that happened long before your ancestors even saw Ellis Island. "White privilege" is the privilege to constantly be lectured to about how much you're disadvantaging people who make 20-50 times more than their cousins who are descended from Africans that didn't get free passage to America.

Yeah, privilege feels pretty good...

9/18/2008 10:10:11 PM

^ I can see you're more familiar with white privilege than you let on. You've just produced a textbook example.

9/18/2008 10:15:07 PM

just live life as a closet racist...works for whites, darks, reds, browns, etc

9/18/2008 10:30:05 PM

Quote :

"Let's see, "white privilege" is the privilege of having money withheld from your paycheck so that unwed non-white mothers can get foodstamps and medicaid."

A very, very small percentage of your paycheck, maybe. As you know, plenty of whites use such programs. More critically, plenty of other government spending benefits white people. For example, a considerable chunk of the federal budget goes to killing nonwhite folks. State money goes to bailout companies run by whites and protect the property of whites. And on and on.

Quote :

""White priviliege" is the privilege of being bound by law to financially support departments of something studies and critical something at public universities which teach that white people are evil and responsible for everything bad in the world."

I'll ignore your absurd mischaracterization for the moment. By your logic, how do you think nonwhites feel about all the other departments. Great Things Dead White Men Did. Great Things Great White Men Wrote. Great Things Dead White Men Discovered and Invented. Etc.

I might respond to more of your points once I collect myself.

9/18/2008 10:47:06 PM

Quote :

""White privilege" is the privilege to constantly be lectured to about how much you're disadvantaging people who make 20-50 times more than their cousins who are descended from Africans that didn't get free passage to America."

LOL

9/18/2008 11:02:54 PM

White privilege might be characterizing a trade that killed millions of Africans as free passage.

9/18/2008 11:07:17 PM

Quote :

"Look, it's been done, freedom summer, Selma, the March on Washington. Did you just skip that chapter in the history books? Institutionalized, legally mandated racism has been overturned. What you derisively call "Johnny Appleseeds" of tolerance had a large part to do with that."

What they did had a direct impact on laws, which in turn caused a change of environment that helped accelerate the decline of racism. There were those people they personally inspired to take a proactive anti-racism stance, maybe even reject racism they had once held. But there were also those people who they inspired to kill civil rights workers and bomb churches. Those people weren't stopped by a surge of goodwill, they were stopped by the National Guard and the FBI.

Quote :

"The number of actual racists gets smaller each year and they are now a marginal, politically inconsequential group. Nobody takes the salisburyboys and steve9194s seriously anymore."

This is laughable. They may not be a dominating force anymore, and they may even have to keep some of their opinions to themselves, but there's plenty of influential racists in this country. Salisburyboy and steve9194 are militant in their hatred, something that the more run-of-the-mill bigots abhor -- either because it's bad press or "We don't want to hurt anybody, we just think it would be better if they stayed in their own neighborhood"

Quote :

"you're welcome to do more, as long as you don't try and get my money stolen by the Gov or try and do it by instituting racial quotas or violating freedom of association."

I suppose it would be salt in the wound to point out that in this country I'm welcome to do more, including getting your money stolen by the government. Of course, I'm making fun of you because there's not much else to do after a line like this in the context of this thread, because it has nothing to do with racism and everything to do with the fundamental difference between libertarians and people who aren't insane.

Quote :

"they have to lift themselves up, just like everyone else."

This is a sack of shit. There are a depressingly large number of people in this country that have never had to lift themselves an inch. And part of the reason that many people are already plenty elevated is slavery, which people still do profit from. Not directly, of course, but it happens all the same. If Bill's family has been rich ever since they built up their plantation, and Bill's inherited wealth allows him to live his life in luxury with minimal effort centuries later, can you really say he didn't get lifted up, that he isn't profiting from slavery?

But of course talk about that, like talk about reparations, is beside the point. Turning racism into an issue focused on the past does nobody any good. It leads to guilt, revanchism, and fracturing societies. I don't favor programs targeted at reducing bigotry and racially-based economic disparity because whites "owe it to blacks" for shitty treatment 200 or even 50 years ago. I do it because their success means a stronger American economy, society, and culture.

9/19/2008 5:47:46 PM

Quote :

"who make 20-50 times more than their cousins who are descended from Africans that didn't get free passage to America. "

you made one mistake Megaloman they did get Free passage over the US

Quote :

"very, very small percentage of your paycheck"

With the 25% taken out of my paycheck by the federal gov't I could repay the loan i had to take out to finish school; instead

I am providing cash for George W to give to his buddies in Halliburton and so 10 welfare queens do not have get a
job yet still get HD cable with the HBO package.

Quote :

"Great Things Dead White Men Did."

What about Great Country Dead White Men started or I would be throwing spears, dying of malaria, or be shot by a 10 yr
old wielding an AK as I live in a continent across the Atlantic ocean

Quote :

"If Bill's family has been rich ever since they built up their plantation, and Bill's inherited wealth allows him to live his life in luxury with minimal effort centuries later, can you really say he didn't get lifted up, that he isn't profiting from slavery?"

That is a sack of shit. All the more likely the descendants of the rich slave owners are lifted up in their mighty double wide trailor driving a 1999 Chevy Camaro with a confederate flag hanging in the
living room to remind them of white power and the "good ole days". I bet of the affluent wealthy families
in american at LEAST 60% start post-civil war. Even of those that can trace aristocrat roots prior to this the odds
are still likely that they were from a non-slave owning family whose money came from industry not picking cotton.

9/19/2008 6:45:38 PM

Quote :

" What about Great Country Dead White Men started or I would be throwing spears, dying of malaria, or be shot by a 10 yr old wielding an AK as I live in a continent across the Atlantic ocean"

Don't forget the latter was also caused by....dead white men

Quote :

"I bet of the affluent wealthy families in american at LEAST 60% start post-civil war. Even of those that can trace aristocrat roots prior to this the odds are still likely that they were from a non-slave owning family whose money came from industry not picking cotton."

Not so much that they were "lifted" but relatively speaking, they were "lifted" by being allowed to go do the real schools, get jobs, loans etc etc.

9/19/2008 7:16:52 PM

Quote :

"Not so much that they were "lifted" but relatively speaking, they were "lifted" by being allowed to go do the real schools, get jobs, loans etc etc."

And yet all the evidence seems to show that new immigrants don't seem to have the same difficulties getting into real schools, getting jobs and loans. So why if racism is as big of an issue, why do a certain group of minorities with no distinguishing features from their native born counterparts not have the same issues?

9/19/2008 8:35:35 PM

Quote :

"I bet of the affluent wealthy families in american at LEAST 60% start post-civil war. Even of those that can trace aristocrat roots prior to this the odds are still likely that they were from a non-slave owning family whose money came from industry not picking cotton."

I didn't say it was a widespread phenomenon, certainly not in North Carolina. And any wealth generated in the south before the Civil War was created or maintained by slavery, because it was a major factor in the economy. If you ran a shipping business, for example, you were exporting shit slaves harvested and important fancy shit for the slave owners.

Quote :

"And yet all the evidence seems to show that new immigrants don't seem to have the same difficulties getting into real schools, getting jobs and loans. So why if racism is as big of an issue, why do a certain group of minorities with no distinguishing features from their native born counterparts not have the same issues?"

In order to get into the United States, even illegally, you have to be pretty fucking determined. Taking the legal route is an arduous process that often doesn't produce results, and the results it does produce are skewed to skilled, educated individuals. Getting here illegally involves a fair amount of danger, perseverance, and cleverness at evasion and deception. As a result, new immigrants in this country tend to be more motivated and, in some cases, smarter than the general population.

Being born in this country is pretty much an issue of random chance. People who just fell out of their moms in the US of A didn't do any work to get here, so they're the "average." This is true for people of all races. An African immigrant to this country today has likely seen some seriously fucked up shit back home and has certainly gone through a painstaking process to get here, so he's going to be more motivated than the average folks here who waste away and the average folks back in Africa who are complacent with its shittiness.

9/22/2008 3:16:04 AM

Theres a difference between subconscious racial profiling (the focus of the article) and overt racial discrimination (the focus of your response). I don't know if I would go so far as to say you are making a complete straw man, but that arguement could be made.

9/22/2008 7:58:28 AM

Quote :

" And yet all the evidence seems to show that new immigrants don't seem to have the same difficulties getting into real schools, getting jobs and loans. So why if racism is as big of an issue, why do a certain group of minorities with no distinguishing features from their native born counterparts not have the same issues?"

Because their parents, grandparents etc didn't go through all of that (not being able to do such and such). This is their fresh start.

9/22/2008 11:18:18 AM

Quote :

"An African immigrant to this country today has likely seen some seriously fucked up shit back home and has certainly gone through a painstaking process to get here, so he's going to be more motivated than the average folks here who waste away and the average folks back in Africa who are complacent with its shittiness."

So then, as I said, it's a matter of effort rather than whether the racist system is holding you down or propping others up.

Quote :

"Because their parents, grandparents etc didn't go through all of that (not being able to do such and such). This is their fresh start."

No, but a lot of them did come from Africa. I don't know if you've looked recently, but Africa is hardly being held up as a land of opportunity.

9/22/2008 1:43:47 PM

I thought this thread was about http://abcnewsstore.go.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/DSIProductDisplay?catalogId=11002&storeId=20051&productId=2024083&langId=-1&categoryId=100013

9/22/2008 3:13:33 PM

Quote :

"So then, as I said, it's a matter of effort rather than whether the racist system is holding you down or propping others up."

It's both. Nobody here is denying that a certain amount of effort on an individual's part can overcome these problems. Even during slavery it was possible, through herculean effort, for a slave to buy his own freedom and become relatively well-off, but you wouldn't say, "It's a matter of effort rather than the slavery system."

In order for real parity to be achieved there is certainly going to be more effort made by disadvantaged communities. I agree wholeheartedly. But when a black man's effort produces less than an equal effort made by a white man, the system is broken, too. And while this country has made leaps and bounds in correcting that problem, there are still areas (geographically and institutionally) where the system is in disrepair. And it's not always because of classic "I don't like nigras" racism, either; current entitlement systems could use significant overhauling in order to stop subsidizing lack of effort.

9/22/2008 3:57:30 PM

The whiny liberal ohh boo hoo poor disadvantaged minorities actually turns into a self-fulfilling prophecy for those within the choice group who take to heart the "struggling minority" bullshit message.

We are not in the 1960's....

I'd say 95% of modern day america who is left behind is there because of their lack of intelligence, motivation, or are just plain lazy. Why should i do homework and study in school when i can "get rich quick" dealing drugs and shooting up da crips who enter my turf.

9/22/2008 5:52:53 PM

I enjoy and GREATLy enjoy the fact that this topic is being discussed, b/c it NEEDS to be....


Continue....

9/22/2008 7:57:38 PM

You do realize the great majority of Confederate landowners were destitute after the war.

9/22/2008 10:46:34 PM

^ thats conservative KKK hogwash as well as the fact that a majority of white americans have no connection to slavery, cause we all know the black man is deserved reparations for 400 years of repression

9/22/2008 11:25:57 PM

Quote :

"I'd say 95% of modern day america who is left behind is there because of their lack of intelligence, motivation, or are just plain lazy."

No doubt this figure comes from extensive research and experience, definitely more than a couple of anecdotes and stereotypes, in spite of the shit that constantly spews from your keyboard.

Quote :

"You do realize the great majority of Confederate landowners were destitute after the war."

Even though this assertion is awfully bold and without any backing in this thread, I don't recall ever disagreeing with it.

^Has anyone in this thread suggested reparations?

[Edited on September 22, 2008 at 11:45 PM. Reason : ]

9/22/2008 11:45:25 PM

I actually had a coworker of mine, a black British/Jamaican immigrant say to me, out of the blue one day, "you know, I don't understand all this racism stuff in the US, I've never really experienced discrimination."

I think it's like a lot of things. If you go through life looking for racial discrimination behind every bush and under every rock, I'm sure that's what you'll find. If, however, you go through life looking for opportunities, it'll be opportunity that you tend to find.

9/23/2008 4:13:41 AM

Personally, I notice plenty of racism from my fellow whites without seeking it out.

9/23/2008 11:56:34 AM

I think it's great that Megaloman lives in this great part of the country where these problems don't exist. Unfortunately I have to go back home to Randolph County every so often, where unicorns don't shit out pots of gold underneath rainbows and where people actually are very, very racist, and vocal about it.

Every time my dad and our "neighbor" check the mailbox at the same time, he says, "Doug, what are we gonna do about all them n-ggers?" Although lately he sometimes inserts "Mex-i-cans" instead. I had a black friend from Greensboro (where I went to high school) come visit, and he won't return to the town because of an incident at the local gas station. I mean, if we're going to have anecdote time, I want to participate.

9/24/2008 3:53:37 AM

Of course the gov't never limits itself to doing just what you want. You wanted the federal gov't to end state-mandated segregation...you got it. But you also ended up with affirmitive action, judges running school districts, quotas, forced associations, and animosity among the races because the gov't is picking winners and losers.

The federal gov't should have simply over-ruled and eliminated the state-segregation laws. But instead it went further by prohibiting discrimination. I think that if segregation hadn't been the law in the south, it would've dispappeared on its own. With no law mandating segregation, the first white company to hire blacks and serve all customers would have set in motion the train of events that would have made further segregation impossible.

9/24/2008 11:15:38 AM

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/naive

9/24/2008 3:33:52 PM

Quote :

"I think it's great that Megaloman lives in this great part of the country where these problems don't exist."

I'm not sure I believe that. I'm not saying he personally encounters racism, but I doubt any regions lack the phenomenon.

9/24/2008 3:42:29 PM