Bull Ring A discussion on race

[Hellbilly]

Invite everyone.

I prefer my response

No shit.

 

[mudwhistle]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

Because they lose every real debate in their own hobby forum Race/Racism, and desperately need to censor the obvious failure rere cities and their education and criminal justice systems for the last 50 years, in some cases over 70 years. The failures in the Hoods are entirely on black 'leadership' and the rampant corruption in everything they touch and influence. Like Moynihan said a long time ago, the black middle class just uses the violent hood rats as hostages to extort bennies for themselves, and do nothing to improve poverty and stupidity among black people in general.

No, you lost and there was no black supremacist present.

You guys don't want debate, you want an echo chamber to spew your ignorance.

Everything you say here is incorrect. But those like you can't accept the truth. Because that truth destrys your white boy lie you tell yourselves about your superiority.

When you use the phrase 'white boy'....to me it's like saying n****r. Don't do that.

And whites don't as a rule think they're superior.....not unless you take into account the way Democrats and Libertarians think. They really think they're better than the rest of us....including blacks.
Democrats have always been this way throughout American history. They used to be the KKK....and now they've changes tactics and now they're acting like they support blacks....when in fact they're just using them to do their dirty work.

No the term white boy is not even close to the n word. But whites such as yoursellf have to create something to deny the racism whites have pushed. And stop lying about republicans. I mean I am in here reading post after post full of racism from republicans to include you and yet you try telling me this. I know what has been done in America. Southern whites were mostly democrats, now they are republicans. Northern whites were in the KKK and some of them were republican. Todays white republican such as you continue trying to gaslight us with garbage like you have posted here.

Nonsense. The KKK was Southern Democrats. Ku Klux Klan
Northern Republicans weren't in the KKK because the Republican party was created to end slavery. The KKK was created to attack whites and black Republicans. MLK was a Republican, despite what Communist News Network (CNN) says. It is just gaslighting to change history when they tell you otherwise. Democrats didn't side with blacks till the Kennedy's got into politics. Before then....the Democrat Party was George Wallace, LBJ, Al Gore Sr, Jimmy Carter, and Robert Byrd. Whitewashing the Democratic Party’s History | National Review
And there is no difference between calling someone a white boy and a 'n****r'. You call each other n****rs.....so it appears the only time it's an insult is when a white person says it. The same goes when a black person calls me a 'white boy'. It ends up in a fight. I've jacked up plenty of punks who called me that.
And gaslighting is lying to someone to get them to do something they don't realize they're doing. It's manipulation. That's what Biden did in Tulsa this week.

​

​

Gaslighting is an insidious form of manipulation and psychological control. Victims of gaslighting are deliberately and systematically fed false information that leads them to question what they know to be true, often about themselves. They may end up doubting their memory, their perception, and even their sanity. Over time, a gaslighter’s manipulations can grow more complex and potent, making it increasingly difficult for the victim to see the truth. Gaslighting​

He used a long forgotten event from 100yrs ago to claim that White Supremacists are a major threat today. He wants you to hate whites.....so they can keep you in the Democrat Party. I'm being up front and honest. I'm not a Social/Dem/Progressive trying to get you to do stuff you normally wouldn't do. I'm not trying to get you to start shit, with inflammatory rhetoric designed to bring out the worst in you.

 

[petro]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

They sure won't talk about the many youths in the Twin Cities recently shot in drive by shootings the latest last night in the suburbs at a damn graduation party.
At the same time they will support protesters who are burning shit in the streets over a wanted armed fugitive that was shot during a US Marshals Service here this week.

 

[mudwhistle]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

They sure won't talk about the many youths in the Twin Cities recently shot in drive by shootings the latest last night in the suburbs at a damn graduation party.
At the same time they will support protesters who are burning shit in the streets over a wanted armed fugitive that was shot during a US Marshals Service here this week.

Well.....if it doesn't fit their agenda....they don't want us to talk about it.

 

[mudwhistle]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

Because libs like to win the debates and limiting the discussion benefits their side

It's designed to put us on the defense.
At one time Democrats were the opposition party. When they aren't in power they oppose everything. When they're in power....they're trying to screw us over. This usually ends up blowing up in their faces and they lose power. Now....they think they have it rigged so they don't have to worry anymore what the voters think about what they're doing. That is oppression.

 

[emilynghiem]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

Because they lose every real debate in their own hobby forum Race/Racism, and desperately need to censor the obvious failures of black public policy as practiced by racist black radicals since the Nixon era gave them a blank check and control of entire cities and their education and criminal justice systems for the last 50 years, in some cases over 70 years. The failures in the Hoods are entirely on black 'leadership' and the rampant corruption in everything they touch and influence. Like Moynihan said a long time ago, the black middle class just uses the violent hood rats as hostages to extort bennies for themselves, and do nothing to improve poverty and stupidity among black people in general.

No, you lost and there was no black supremacist present.

You guys don't want debate, you want an echo chamber to spew your ignorance.

Everything you say here is incorrect. But those like you can't accept the truth. Because that truth destrys your white boy lie you tell yourselves about your superiority.

Dear IM2 and Mac-7
Let's restart the clock and record keeping
with a fair starting mark.

Black leaders and populations would have to own their own property and develop their own programs and policies WITHOUT depending on anything from "White culture or classes."

Heck, speaking English might even count as White cultural bias.

Let's set up independent city-states/economy first.

Then assess how much is coming from Black leadership/ownership
as opposed to interference or control by Whites, spinning this for disparity and dominance over others!

What are you trying to say here Emily?

You can't just restart the clock and pretend everything stasrts out even. Whites did not bhuild this by themselves. They depended on black labor.

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry​

In todays money slaves were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. In 1860 the total value of slaves was 17- and one-half times more than the money circulating in the economy. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, the following activity could occur.

During slavery, more specifically during the 19th century, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea- slave backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves; and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves​

I'm pointing out that monetary reparations is not enough to fix the problems.

Independent land ownership and self government of choice are also necessary to liberate people from an unequal system of govt owning and taxing land, instead of individuals owning their own land and governing the system of taxation and representation in the terms of policies and services.

 

[IM2]

a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry​

In todays money slaves were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. In 1860 the total value of slaves was 17- and one-half times more than the money circulating in the economy. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S.

You presume too much

Slaves were only 13% of the population and could not possibly account for more of the total value of the US than the same 13%

Incorrect.

 

[IM2]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

Because they lose every real debate in their own hobby forum Race/Racism, and desperately need to censor the obvious failures of black public policy as practiced by racist black radicals since the Nixon era gave them a blank check and control of entire cities and their education and criminal justice systems for the last 50 years, in some cases over 70 years. The failures in the Hoods are entirely on black 'leadership' and the rampant corruption in everything they touch and influence. Like Moynihan said a long time ago, the black middle class just uses the violent hood rats as hostages to extort bennies for themselves, and do nothing to improve poverty and stupidity among black people in general.

No, you lost and there was no black supremacist present.

You guys don't want debate, you want an echo chamber to spew your ignorance.

Everything you say here is incorrect. But those like you can't accept the truth. Because that truth destrys your white boy lie you tell yourselves about your superiority.

Dear IM2 and Mac-7
Let's restart the clock and record keeping
with a fair starting mark.

Black leaders and populations would have to own their own property and develop their own programs and policies WITHOUT depending on anything from "White culture or classes."

Heck, speaking English might even count as White cultural bias.

Let's set up independent city-states/economy first.

Then assess how much is coming from Black leadership/ownership
as opposed to interference or control by Whites, spinning this for disparity and dominance over others!

What are you trying to say here Emily?

You can't just restart the clock and pretend everything stasrts out even. Whites did not bhuild this by themselves. They depended on black labor.

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry​

In todays money slaves were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. In 1860 the total value of slaves was 17- and one-half times more than the money circulating in the economy. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, the following activity could occur.

During slavery, more specifically during the 19th century, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea- slave backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves; and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves​

I'm pointing out that monetary reparations is not enough to fix the problems.

Independent land ownership and self government of choice are also necessary to liberate people from an unequal system of govt owning and taxing land, instead of individuals owning their own land and governing the system of taxation and representation in the terms of policies and services.

What you are pointing out is wrong. We live here the government provided land and everything elsefor whites. Native Americans signed treaties for reparations. Japanese got reparations for WW2 even as Jim Crow was being practiced. White descenants of people who suceeded the union and declared war on this country who neither fought during the Civil War or were alive when it happened got reparations. We are asking for equal citizenship and redress for damages caused by this government. Doing that will allow backs to control the essential functions of our coomunities.

 

[emilynghiem]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

Because they lose every real debate in their own hobby forum Race/Racism, and desperately need to censor the obvious failures of black public policy as practiced by racist black radicals since the Nixon era gave them a blank check and control of entire cities and their education and criminal justice systems for the last 50 years, in some cases over 70 years. The failures in the Hoods are entirely on black 'leadership' and the rampant corruption in everything they touch and influence. Like Moynihan said a long time ago, the black middle class just uses the violent hood rats as hostages to extort bennies for themselves, and do nothing to improve poverty and stupidity among black people in general.

No, you lost and there was no black supremacist present.

You guys don't want debate, you want an echo chamber to spew your ignorance.

Everything you say here is incorrect. But those like you can't accept the truth. Because that truth destrys your white boy lie you tell yourselves about your superiority.

Dear IM2 and Mac-7
Let's restart the clock and record keeping
with a fair starting mark.

Black leaders and populations would have to own their own property and develop their own programs and policies WITHOUT depending on anything from "White culture or classes."

Heck, speaking English might even count as White cultural bias.

Let's set up independent city-states/economy first.

Then assess how much is coming from Black leadership/ownership
as opposed to interference or control by Whites, spinning this for disparity and dominance over others!

What are you trying to say here Emily?

You can't just restart the clock and pretend everything stasrts out even. Whites did not bhuild this by themselves. They depended on black labor.

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry​

In todays money slaves were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. In 1860 the total value of slaves was 17- and one-half times more than the money circulating in the economy. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, the following activity could occur.

During slavery, more specifically during the 19th century, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea- slave backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves; and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves​

I'm pointing out that monetary reparations is not enough to fix the problems.

Independent land ownership and self government of choice are also necessary to liberate people from an unequal system of govt owning and taxing land, instead of individuals owning their own land and governing the system of taxation and representation in the terms of policies and services.

What you are pointing out is wrong. We live here the government provided land and everything elsefor whites. Native Americans signed treaties for reparations. Japanese got reparations for WW2 even as Jim Crow was being practiced. White descenants of people who suceeded the union and declared war on this country who neither fought during the Civil War or were alive when it happened got reparations. We are asking for equal citizenship and redress for damages caused by this government. Doing that will allow backs to control the essential functions of our coomunities.

IM2 We agree more than we disagree.
I'm saying Black leaders need to first claim equal land and property to manage and own directly, equal to the US claiming jurisdiction and equal to Native tribes holding land outside US jurisdiction.

Then you can start the whole Reparations discussion, assessment of historic damages and restitution owed from there. From a fully equal and independent position as human beings with equal rights by nature, before any racially biased Christian or Constitutional institutions skewed the process.

If you continue trying to argue while under the jurisdiction of the system you oppose as white racist privilege bias, then this gets skewed and censored.

First step is to reclaim and reposition yourself out from under that cloak.

Then you can speak equally without running into the same walls and obstructions.

The Rising of the Moors may be similar to calling for independent recognition.

Having separate sovereign land will help leverage the equal identity of people whose historical backgound was denied equal property rights and ownership.

Standing on equal ground changes the whole dynamic and discussion.

 

[mudwhistle]

I wonder why the only topic we're allowed to discuss is what the left wants us to.

Because they lose every real debate in their own hobby forum Race/Racism, and desperately need to censor the obvious failures of black public policy as practiced by racist black radicals since the Nixon era gave them a blank check and control of entire cities and their education and criminal justice systems for the last 50 years, in some cases over 70 years. The failures in the Hoods are entirely on black 'leadership' and the rampant corruption in everything they touch and influence. Like Moynihan said a long time ago, the black middle class just uses the violent hood rats as hostages to extort bennies for themselves, and do nothing to improve poverty and stupidity among black people in general.

No, you lost and there was no black supremacist present.

You guys don't want debate, you want an echo chamber to spew your ignorance.

Everything you say here is incorrect. But those like you can't accept the truth. Because that truth destrys your white boy lie you tell yourselves about your superiority.

Dear IM2 and Mac-7
Let's restart the clock and record keeping
with a fair starting mark.

Black leaders and populations would have to own their own property and develop their own programs and policies WITHOUT depending on anything from "White culture or classes."

Heck, speaking English might even count as White cultural bias.

Let's set up independent city-states/economy first.

Then assess how much is coming from Black leadership/ownership
as opposed to interference or control by Whites, spinning this for disparity and dominance over others!

What are you trying to say here Emily?

You can't just restart the clock and pretend everything stasrts out even. Whites did not bhuild this by themselves. They depended on black labor.

“By a conservative estimate, in 1860 the total value of American slaves was $4 billion, far more than the gold and silver then circulating nationally ($228.3 million, “most of it in the North,” the authors add), total currency ($435.4 million), and even the value of the South’s total farmland ($1.92 billion). Slaves were, to slavers, worth more than everything else they could imagine combined.”

Ned & Constance Sublette, The American Slave Coast: A History of the Slave-Breeding Industry​

In todays money slaves were worth over 127 billion dollars. According to the Sublettes that is a conservative estimate, meaning the amount could be even more. In 1860 the total value of slaves was 17- and one-half times more than the money circulating in the economy. Slaves were worth more than the gold, silver, total U.S. currency, plus all the farmland in the South combined in 1860 yet did not receive a dime. Remember that slaves were considered property. Because they were, the following activity could occur.

During slavery, more specifically during the 19th century, wealthy slaveowners looking for a way to get additional capital to buy more slaves came up with an idea- slave backed securities. Your eyes are not playing tricks on you. Slaveowners securitized slavery. Cornell professors Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman detailed how it was done in an article published by the Chicago Sun-Times on its website dated March 7, 2014. This is from the article:

In the 1830s, powerful Southern slaveowners wanted to import capital into their states so they could buy more slaves. They came up with a new, two-part idea: mortgaging slaves; and then turning the mortgages into bonds that could be marketed all over the world.

First, American planters organized new banks, usually in new states like Mississippi and Louisiana. Drawing up lists of slaves for collateral, the planters then mortgaged them to the banks they had created, enabling themselves to buy additional slaves to expand cotton production. To provide capital for those loans, the banks sold bonds to investors from around the globe — London, New York, Amsterdam, Paris. The bond buyers, many of whom lived in countries where slavery was illegal, didn’t own individual slaves — just bonds backed by their value. Planters’ mortgage payments paid the interest and the principle on these bond payments. Enslaved human beings had been, in modern financial lingo, “securitized.”

As slave-backed mortgages became paper bonds, everybody profited — except, obviously, enslaved African Americans whose forced labor repaid owners’ mortgages. But investors owed a piece of slave-earned income. Older slave states such as Maryland and Virginia sold slaves to the new cotton states, at securitization-inflated prices, resulting in slave asset bubble. Cotton factor firms like the now-defunct Lehman Brothers — founded in Alabama — became wildly successful. Lehman moved to Wall Street, and for all these firms, every transaction in slave-earned money flowing in and out of the U.S. earned Wall Street firms a fee.

The infant American financial industry nourished itself on profits taken from financing slave traders, cotton brokers and underwriting slave-backed bonds. But though slavery ended in 1865, in the years after the Civil War, black entrepreneurs would find themselves excluded from a financial system originally built on their bodies.

Edward E. Baptist and Louis Hyman, American Finance Grew on the Back of Slaves​

I'm pointing out that monetary reparations is not enough to fix the problems.

Independent land ownership and self government of choice are also necessary to liberate people from an unequal system of govt owning and taxing land, instead of individuals owning their own land and governing the system of taxation and representation in the terms of policies and services.

What you are pointing out is wrong. We live here the government provided land and everything elsefor whites. Native Americans signed treaties for reparations. Japanese got reparations for WW2 even as Jim Crow was being practiced. White descenants of people who suceeded the union and declared war on this country who neither fought during the Civil War or were alive when it happened got reparations. We are asking for equal citizenship and redress for damages caused by this government. Doing that will allow backs to control the essential functions of our coomunities.

IM2 We agree more than we disagree.
I'm saying Black leaders need to first claim equal land and property to manage and own directly, equal to the US claiming jurisdiction and equal to Native tribes holding land outside US jurisdiction.

Then you can start the whole Reparations discussion, assessment of historic damages and restitution owed from there. From a fully equal and independent position as human beings with equal rights by nature, before any racially biased Christian or Constitutional institutions skewed the process.

If you continue trying to argue while under the jurisdiction of the system you oppose as white racist privilege bias, then this gets skewed and censored.

First step is to reclaim and reposition yourself out from under that cloak.

Then you can speak equally without running into the same walls and obstructions.

The Rising of the Moors may be similar to calling for independent recognition.

Having separate sovereign land will help leverage the equal identity of people whose historical backgound was denied equal property rights and ownership.

Standing on equal ground changes the whole dynamic and discussion.

So move back to Africa.

 

[Baron Von Murderpaws]

I had a friend for many years, until she asked me who I was voting for back in 2016.
I told her I was voting Trump. She then proceeded to tell me that she could no longer
be friends with me because of what a "hate-mongering racist Trump is".
And yet.......she did to me, what she claimed Trump was doing to others......hating them
for not thinking as they do. So sad she turned out to be another brainwashed hypocrite.

When you claim exclusion is "bad", and then practice it yourself, you are the essence of
what a true hypocrite is.