Examining the traits of racism.

[Meathead]

..it's hard to believe the blacks would not do the same if the roles were reversed
..also the same with the Native Americans against the whites--many NA tribes decimated/displaced/tortured/warred on/etc other tribes long before the whites came
..Shaka Zulu murdered many of his own and conquered other tribes
..I had a Kenyan friend and he agreed the Africans fought over territory/etc--but he said that was ''different'' !!!!

Ahhhhhh....I get it. The negative things whites are known for doing, blacks would do the same if the roles were reversed. Got it. Yet, when I asked you and others would whites be in the same position as blacks if rolls were reversed beginning in the 1600's........ you all skirted answering the question saying it was not based upon facts and was too hypothetical. Of course many of you believe that whites could endure the exact same experience, as a race, that blacks did in America, but come out much better than blacks. You imply this all the time when you talk about the experience of the Irish, Chinese, Jews or others. You bring them up to suggest that there have been groups that have gone through what blacks have.....and look at them now compared to blacks. Again, you and the others are simply racist.

Could you possibly make more excuses for black failure. Try to think of something novel instead of repeating the same tired stuff. while slightly amusing in the short term, it gets extremely monotonous after a while.

Something new for a change, eh?

..it's hard to believe the blacks would not do the same if the roles were reversed
..also the same with the Native Americans against the whites--many NA tribes decimated/displaced/tortured/warred on/etc other tribes long before the whites came
..Shaka Zulu murdered many of his own and conquered other tribes
..I had a Kenyan friend and he agreed the Africans fought over territory/etc--but he said that was ''different'' !!!!

Ahhhhhh....I get it. The negative things whites are known for doing, blacks would do the same if the roles were reversed. Got it. Yet, when I asked you and others would whites be in the same position as blacks if rolls were reversed beginning in the 1600's........ you all skirted answering the question saying it was not based upon facts and was too hypothetical. Of course many of you believe that whites could endure the exact same experience, as a race, that blacks did in America, but come out much better than blacks. You imply this all the time when you talk about the experience of the Irish, Chinese, Jews or others. You bring them up to suggest that there have been groups that have gone through what blacks have.....and look at them now compared to blacks. Again, you and the others are simply racist.

Could you possibly make more excuses for black failure. Try to think of something novel instead of repeating the same tired stuff. while slightly amusing in the short term, it gets extremely monotonous after a while.

Something new for a change, eh?

Everything happens for a Reason. True or False?
Every effect has a CAUSE. True or False?
Every action produces a reaction. True or False?

Where does EXCUSE fit in the above? There is no such thing as an EXCUSE, given the above. Either something is true or it is false. Its TRUE that whites have histrionically oppressed blacks. Its true that oppression was an ACTION that manifested a REACTION upon blacks. What was that reaction in terms of economics, culture, psychological, sociology, geography, etc?

If you can't think of any new excuses for black failure, do the jungle-bunny civilization stuff. That never gets old.

Yeah.....Excuse = anything that includes the history of what whites have done to blacks in explaining the condition of blacks.

This is where you default to the jungle-bunny civilization stuff.

 

[Mickiel]

observation:
..we have undeniably proved Africa is a shithole
..above/near Africa we have the Middle East which is a shithole ranking a little better than Africa
..then farther north we have the Balkans-a little better than the ME--but they have had many tribal/ethnic problems up until the 90s
...then, farther north, you have Europe and Scandinavia which have been the most stable and prosperous in recent times
why is this?
better yet--lets have a separate thread on this

You have NEVER even been to Africa...so the only thing you are going off of is selection bias fueled by a racist mind. I have been to Ghana and I would not call Ghana a Sh!t hole....at least not what I experienced.

AKIP, you are denying the undeniable
Africa is undeniable the world's biggest shithole--everyone in the world knows this
they get the same information as you and I do....

I think the ocean is the world's biggest shithole.

 

[harmonica]

..it's hard to believe the blacks would not do the same if the roles were reversed
..also the same with the Native Americans against the whites--many NA tribes decimated/displaced/tortured/warred on/etc other tribes long before the whites came
..Shaka Zulu murdered many of his own and conquered other tribes
..I had a Kenyan friend and he agreed the Africans fought over territory/etc--but he said that was ''different'' !!!!

Ahhhhhh....I get it. The negative things whites are known for doing, blacks would do the same if the roles were reversed. Got it. Yet, when I asked you and others would whites be in the same position as blacks if rolls were reversed beginning in the 1600's........ you all skirted answering the question saying it was not based upon facts and was too hypothetical. Of course many of you believe that whites could endure the exact same experience, as a race, that blacks did in America, but come out much better than blacks. You imply this all the time when you talk about the experience of the Irish, Chinese, Jews or others. You bring them up to suggest that there have been groups that have gone through what blacks have.....and look at them now compared to blacks. Again, you and the others are simply racist.

fact:
blacks have --
enslaved/murdered/warred on/committed genocide/urinated/crapped/etc--all the same things whites have done--no hypothetical about that
..why don't you link the specific thread /posts you are yakking about

I don't have to link anything. I will ask you again. If whites experienced what blacks experienced, in terms of racial oppression, in the time and space that blacks experienced it, would whites be any different socioeconomically than blacks today? Would they have less problems than blacks have today, the same or more?

....depends on their cultural history......are they living in grass huts/no alphabet/no technology/etc??

Just like I thought. More obfuscation. When child is born in America, they have no culture, no language....just instincts. Hence, I am saying that if the white people born in America, since 1600, experienced in degree and kind what black children born into this land experienced, would whites be any better, worse or the same as blacks are today socioeconomically?

the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

 

[Meathead]

[
the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

The whites of 1600 BC were much more advanced than the blacks of 1600.

 

[AKIP]

Ahhhhhh....I get it. The negative things whites are known for doing, blacks would do the same if the roles were reversed. Got it. Yet, when I asked you and others would whites be in the same position as blacks if rolls were reversed beginning in the 1600's........ you all skirted answering the question saying it was not based upon facts and was too hypothetical. Of course many of you believe that whites could endure the exact same experience, as a race, that blacks did in America, but come out much better than blacks. You imply this all the time when you talk about the experience of the Irish, Chinese, Jews or others. You bring them up to suggest that there have been groups that have gone through what blacks have.....and look at them now compared to blacks. Again, you and the others are simply racist.

fact:
blacks have --
enslaved/murdered/warred on/committed genocide/urinated/crapped/etc--all the same things whites have done--no hypothetical about that
..why don't you link the specific thread /posts you are yakking about

I don't have to link anything. I will ask you again. If whites experienced what blacks experienced, in terms of racial oppression, in the time and space that blacks experienced it, would whites be any different socioeconomically than blacks today? Would they have less problems than blacks have today, the same or more?

....depends on their cultural history......are they living in grass huts/no alphabet/no technology/etc??

Just like I thought. More obfuscation. When child is born in America, they have no culture, no language....just instincts. Hence, I am saying that if the white people born in America, since 1600, experienced in degree and kind what black children born into this land experienced, would whites be any better, worse or the same as blacks are today socioeconomically?

the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

A white newborn in 1600 was more advanced than a black newborn in 1600? How? What did nature provide the white newborn that it did not equip the black newborn with, in regards to its ability to learn and prosper?

Birth is a RESTART. You are not born with knowledge or culture....you pick it up from your environment. Blacks and whites born in America in 1600 should have had access to the same culture, learning, etc, needed to prosper. Its irrelevant what was going on in Africa once a child is born in America.....America is where the child will learn. European society being more advanced than African society is not transferred. Whatever your society has learned and created, a child is not born with it, but has to LEARN it. Hence, white and black children born in America should theoretically have had access to what America had to offer in terms of knowledge and culture.

 

[ptbw forever]

Our language is becoming more and more littered with racist overtones , some more hidden than others.

That is entirely the “progressives’” fault.

 

[Mickiel]

Our language is becoming more and more littered with racist overtones , some more hidden than others.

That is entirely the “progressives’” fault.

What race that you know of has no progressives then?

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Apparently, if I don't agree with someone, I'm a racist.

 

[ptbw forever]

Our language is becoming more and more littered with racist overtones , some more hidden than others.

That is entirely the “progressives’” fault.

What race that you know of has no progressives then?

The only real progressives are white, but “progressives” can be any color.

 

[Mickiel]

Our language is becoming more and more littered with racist overtones , some more hidden than others.

That is entirely the “progressives’” fault.

What race that you know of has no progressives then?

The only real progressives are white, but “progressives” can be any color.

That seems like contradiction in my view; I don't see any race having favor in the area of being progressives. To claim that Whites are the only real progressives is just a racist statement at its core , but you believe it so its at your core of knowledge, its only what you are aware of. A very limited point of view.

 

[Mickiel]

Apparently, if I don't agree with someone, I'm a racist.

I don't agree with that ; disagreement is not racism.

 

[Soggy in NOLA]

Apparently, if I don't agree with someone, I'm a racist.

I don't agree with that ; disagreement is not racism.

Of course not, that was my point.

 

[harmonica]

fact:
blacks have --
enslaved/murdered/warred on/committed genocide/urinated/crapped/etc--all the same things whites have done--no hypothetical about that
..why don't you link the specific thread /posts you are yakking about

I don't have to link anything. I will ask you again. If whites experienced what blacks experienced, in terms of racial oppression, in the time and space that blacks experienced it, would whites be any different socioeconomically than blacks today? Would they have less problems than blacks have today, the same or more?

....depends on their cultural history......are they living in grass huts/no alphabet/no technology/etc??

Just like I thought. More obfuscation. When child is born in America, they have no culture, no language....just instincts. Hence, I am saying that if the white people born in America, since 1600, experienced in degree and kind what black children born into this land experienced, would whites be any better, worse or the same as blacks are today socioeconomically?

the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

A white newborn in 1600 was more advanced than a black newborn in 1600? How? What did nature provide the white newborn that it did not equip the black newborn with, in regards to its ability to learn and prosper?

Birth is a RESTART. You are not born with knowledge or culture....you pick it up from your environment. Blacks and whites born in America in 1600 should have had access to the same culture, learning, etc, needed to prosper. Its irrelevant what was going on in Africa once a child is born in America.....America is where the child will learn. European society being more advanced than African society is not transferred. Whatever your society has learned and created, a child is not born with it, but has to LEARN it. Hence, white and black children born in America should theoretically have had access to what America had to offer in terms of knowledge and culture.

fact:
blacks have --
enslaved/murdered/warred on/committed genocide/urinated/crapped/etc--all the same things whites have done--no hypothetical about that
..why don't you link the specific thread /posts you are yakking about

I don't have to link anything. I will ask you again. If whites experienced what blacks experienced, in terms of racial oppression, in the time and space that blacks experienced it, would whites be any different socioeconomically than blacks today? Would they have less problems than blacks have today, the same or more?

....depends on their cultural history......are they living in grass huts/no alphabet/no technology/etc??

Just like I thought. More obfuscation. When child is born in America, they have no culture, no language....just instincts. Hence, I am saying that if the white people born in America, since 1600, experienced in degree and kind what black children born into this land experienced, would whites be any better, worse or the same as blacks are today socioeconomically?

the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

A white newborn in 1600 was more advanced than a black newborn in 1600? How? What did nature provide the white newborn that it did not equip the black newborn with, in regards to its ability to learn and prosper?

Birth is a RESTART. You are not born with knowledge or culture....you pick it up from your environment. Blacks and whites born in America in 1600 should have had access to the same culture, learning, etc, needed to prosper. Its irrelevant what was going on in Africa once a child is born in America.....America is where the child will learn. European society being more advanced than African society is not transferred. Whatever your society has learned and created, a child is not born with it, but has to LEARN it. Hence, white and black children born in America should theoretically have had access to what America had to offer in terms of knowledge and culture.

sure --the whites are evil/racists--blacks perfect angels..that's your main point every time.....that's the MSM....that's what the NFL players want you to believe....and Obama/etc

 

[ptbw forever]

Our language is becoming more and more littered with racist overtones , some more hidden than others.

That is entirely the “progressives’” fault.

What race that you know of has no progressives then?

The only real progressives are white, but “progressives” can be any color.

That seems like contradiction in my view; I don't see any race having favor in the area of being progressives. To claim that Whites are the only real progressives is just a racist statement at its core , but you believe it so its at your core of knowledge, its only what you are aware of. A very limited point of view.

White guilt is an exclusive term for a reason.

There isn't a black equivalent because few blacks give a damn about what happens to other races, much less design entire long-term programs of racial integration and equity that end up favoring other races over time.

 

[AKIP]

I don't have to link anything. I will ask you again. If whites experienced what blacks experienced, in terms of racial oppression, in the time and space that blacks experienced it, would whites be any different socioeconomically than blacks today? Would they have less problems than blacks have today, the same or more?

....depends on their cultural history......are they living in grass huts/no alphabet/no technology/etc??

Just like I thought. More obfuscation. When child is born in America, they have no culture, no language....just instincts. Hence, I am saying that if the white people born in America, since 1600, experienced in degree and kind what black children born into this land experienced, would whites be any better, worse or the same as blacks are today socioeconomically?

the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

A white newborn in 1600 was more advanced than a black newborn in 1600? How? What did nature provide the white newborn that it did not equip the black newborn with, in regards to its ability to learn and prosper?

Birth is a RESTART. You are not born with knowledge or culture....you pick it up from your environment. Blacks and whites born in America in 1600 should have had access to the same culture, learning, etc, needed to prosper. Its irrelevant what was going on in Africa once a child is born in America.....America is where the child will learn. European society being more advanced than African society is not transferred. Whatever your society has learned and created, a child is not born with it, but has to LEARN it. Hence, white and black children born in America should theoretically have had access to what America had to offer in terms of knowledge and culture.

I don't have to link anything. I will ask you again. If whites experienced what blacks experienced, in terms of racial oppression, in the time and space that blacks experienced it, would whites be any different socioeconomically than blacks today? Would they have less problems than blacks have today, the same or more?

....depends on their cultural history......are they living in grass huts/no alphabet/no technology/etc??

Just like I thought. More obfuscation. When child is born in America, they have no culture, no language....just instincts. Hence, I am saying that if the white people born in America, since 1600, experienced in degree and kind what black children born into this land experienced, would whites be any better, worse or the same as blacks are today socioeconomically?

the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

A white newborn in 1600 was more advanced than a black newborn in 1600? How? What did nature provide the white newborn that it did not equip the black newborn with, in regards to its ability to learn and prosper?

Birth is a RESTART. You are not born with knowledge or culture....you pick it up from your environment. Blacks and whites born in America in 1600 should have had access to the same culture, learning, etc, needed to prosper. Its irrelevant what was going on in Africa once a child is born in America.....America is where the child will learn. European society being more advanced than African society is not transferred. Whatever your society has learned and created, a child is not born with it, but has to LEARN it. Hence, white and black children born in America should theoretically have had access to what America had to offer in terms of knowledge and culture.

sure --the whites are evil/racists--blacks perfect angels..that's your main point every time.....that's the MSM....that's what the NFL players want you to believe....and Obama/etc

How is saying that a black child born in America, in 1600, was innately equal to a white child and did not genetically inherit any knowledge or culture through there DNA......saying that blacks are perfect angels and whites are evil?

 

[Mickiel]

Our language is becoming more and more littered with racist overtones , some more hidden than others.

That is entirely the “progressives’” fault.

What race that you know of has no progressives then?

The only real progressives are white, but “progressives” can be any color.

That seems like contradiction in my view; I don't see any race having favor in the area of being progressives. To claim that Whites are the only real progressives is just a racist statement at its core , but you believe it so its at your core of knowledge, its only what you are aware of. A very limited point of view.

White guilt is an exclusive term for a reason.

There isn't a black equivalent because few blacks give a damn about what happens to other races, much less design entire long-term programs of racial integration and equity that end up favoring other races over time.

Well I just disagree with your view of Blacks, consider it sad really. But your experience is what it is , its what you see and I understand some of it to be just not really knowing Blacks like you possibly could, if you really wanted to. Hey man, no people are as bad as your making out Blacks to be.

 

[Asclepias]

[
the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

The whites of 1600 BC were much more advanced than the blacks of 1600.

The whites of 1600 BC were only advanced at eating their hair lice for supplemental protein in their diets.

 

[Yarddog]

[
the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

The whites of 1600 BC were much more advanced than the blacks of 1600.

The whites of 1600 BC were only advanced at eating their hair lice for supplemental protein in their diets.

Yeah, I think those whites in the North were probably pretty Tribal... you have something against tribal people?

Checked out the year 1600 BC though, and that was about the time Egypt was conquered by the Asian Tribes from the East, who by the way Brought to the Egyptians new technologies like advanced bronze working, chariots, composite bows, advanced fortifications and ah, lice dip.

 

[Asclepias]

[
the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

The whites of 1600 BC were much more advanced than the blacks of 1600.

The whites of 1600 BC were only advanced at eating their hair lice for supplemental protein in their diets.

Yeah, I think those whites in the North were probably pretty Tribal... you have something against tribal people?

Checked out the year 1600 BC though, and that was about the time Egypt was conquered by the Asian Tribes from the East, who by the way Brought to the Egyptians new technologies like advanced bronze working, chariots, composite bows, advanced fortifications and ah, lice dip.

Wrong. Egypt's Bronze Age begin way back in 3150 BC

 

[Yarddog]

[
the whites of 1600 were much more advanced than the Africans of 1600
yes--they would be better
.....

The whites of 1600 BC were much more advanced than the blacks of 1600.

The whites of 1600 BC were only advanced at eating their hair lice for supplemental protein in their diets.

Yeah, I think those whites in the North were probably pretty Tribal... you have something against tribal people?

Checked out the year 1600 BC though, and that was about the time Egypt was conquered by the Asian Tribes from the East, who by the way Brought to the Egyptians new technologies like advanced bronze working, chariots, composite bows, advanced fortifications and ah, lice dip.

Wrong. Egypt's Bronze Age begin way back in 3150 BC

Just saying they brought them new techniques of Bronze working