The Sickness Racism Breeds

[Toro]

How about a white woman who claims to be Native American but is in fact 1/1,064th Native American?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Whooosh Right over your head.

What difference does it make why the whites did it if you are both wrong?

What is it that you believe I am wrong about and who is the other person who is also allegedly wrong?

I don't know if you're wrong or not as you were not the one to say whites are the weaker race. However, when I pointed out to Asclepias that it was exactly the sort of thing whites did with blacks; view the entire race as less moral, less intelligent, and just generally inferior, that's when you jumped in telling me that whites considered blacks inferior for no good reason so they could justify doing what they want to them and...well, you know what you said.
Anyway, that's when I asked my question. The point is, if whites were wrong then about blacks being inferior then it stands to reason that any blacks who consider whites inferior today are just as wrong as they were then. So if whites then and blacks today are both wrong about the other race being inferior then what difference does it make why the whites thought blacks were inferior?

And it makes a difference to a lot of people who try to understand how and why one group of people could perpetuate such evil against their fellow human beings.

And if this idea that whites are morally and mentally weaker takes hold, will somebody a hundred years hence be asking the same question in regards to whites?

Do you see what I'm getting at? A lot of the stuff that IM2 and Asclepias spout on here is no different than rhetoric spouted by white racists. It's not raising awareness of racism or seeking justice or any noble idea such as that. It's just more of the same.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

"Whites are the weaker race."

Having said that, if you're not talking about all whites then why did you assume I was lying about my story?

"Whites are the weaker race." Get it?

"Whites are the weaker race."

The blacks of the past who were told they were inferior did not stand up and say they were superior, they said they were equal. And they were right. Then blacks like you and Asclepias come along and say blacks are superior and that whites are the weaker race. But you are wrong. That's the difference between you and black civil rights activists of the past.

"The blacks of the past who were told they were inferior did not stand up and say they were superior, they said they were equal. And they were right."

They were more than equal. They were superior and they knew it. I know because they passed it down to my generation. Whites would have died out under the conditions Blacks dealt with. Blacks didnt have to legislate themselves a head start in order to advance. Whites did that. Blacks didnt have to claim whites were not human to appease their insecurity complexes. Whites did that. That tells Black people that Blacks are superior to whites. Some are uncomfortable with that notion but in their bones they know this to be true. Now I dont know if that superiority is organic or just a result of whites weakening themselves through their culture.

If your argument is that the inferior race was whites and they had to legistlate an advantage, doesn't that make them superior ( as they were smart enough to come up with a strategy ensuring their survival?) I mean human beings are much weaker physically than many species on the planet but our intelligence ensures our survival, so we discovered fire, weapons etc to our benefit, making us the dominant species. Your argument is racist and illogical.

No that doesnt make them superior. That makes them decidedly inferior. If whites were superior they would have needed zero legislation or any kind of advantage to out succeed other races. Its like tying a handicapped kids show laces to the other shoe so you win a race. You dont hold back inferior competition. You just beat them.

So on your thinking since human beings need weapons to protect them against stronger animals, they are inferior? Superiority is an ability to secure your survival by whatever means. That is how the rich get richer and the poort get poorer. Or are you saying life is a kids' game and no one should cheat?

Correct. There is a reason we need guns and other weapons. We are inferior to a bear. You ever see what happens when a bear and a unarmed human meet? Nope. Securing your survival by any means is adaptation not superiority. Exactly. People that cheat are weak and need a crutch.

A crutch like, say, white people are the weaker race?

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Do you see what I'm getting at? A lot of the stuff that IM2 and Asclepias spout on here is no different than rhetoric spouted by white racists. It's not raising awareness of racism or seeking justice or any noble idea such as that. It's just more of the same.

You ever heard the axiom "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"? You're viewing the reaction to being abused, exploited and subjugated to unspeakable indignities and human rights violations to whatever motivated the white racists to put this scheme into motion in the first place. They are not the same, nor are they equal.

And it is a character flaw, a moral failing or whatever you want to call it, to do the things that were done to people of African descent in the U.S. but what made it particularly heinous is the fact that the white racists made this abuse the law of the land. So they protected themselves with "the law" while denying the same protection to those they exploited. And even the people who didn't directly put the laws into place but participated in the abusive racist behavior are just as much at fault as the original racists were, up to and including the white racists that are still going around engaging in racist behavior in 2018. They never stopped, had a change of heart nor do I expect them to ever to change during my lifetime. Everyday we hear about a new idiotic incident of white racists gone wild doing stupid and unlawful things.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

"Deflecting"? You're the one who said that whites don't try and stop racism. I'm just asking for clarification as to whether you mean all whites or some whites.

I think you are the one who deflected by not answering. If you had said "Yes, no whites endeavor to stop racism", you know you would be full of shit and everyone would see that. To say otherwise would have required you to crawfish and qualify your remarks. And we can't have that now, can we?

First of all, why would I think my being here would alter that? Secondly, if my being here altered that, you wouldn't do it and I would not be confronting you about it.

First of all, I went back through our entire conversation and found only three questions asked by you:

"How fucking stupid are you?"
"What kind of stupid question is that?
and
"Doesnt it bother you that your ancestors and your current fellow racists feel you need a head start?"


The first two were obviously rhetorical and I answered the last one. So what question are you referring to?

Secondly, my question was what is called a r-h-e-t-o-r-i-c-a-l question. Surely you're familiar with the concept, given your artful mastery of the craft with questions like "How fucking stupid are you?"

No one. But if you're not going to give up yours then don't give me any shit for my white biases and defending the white race from your biased "Whites are the weaker race" and other such nonsense.

How could you go any further than me in analyzing context when you were looking at the same words and context I was?

Oh Jesus, I think I just threw up a little.

You have proven yourself to be full of shit if I have called you full of shit.There are a lot of criteria you have to meet in order for me to label you full of shit. When I do there is no argument or discussion needed. You are full of shit.

You keep contradicting yourself. You just got through saying you already knew the answer to my question. Why would you need clarification?

"I did know the answer to the question."

Clarification for you. I knew the answer and I knew you wouldn't. I know you meant all whites and the point was to get you to see that.

I cant deflect from something you brought up that I never mentioned. You brought up the deflection. I just refused to be deflected.

Whether or not you brought it up or I did is irrelevant, you refused to answer a question.

Obviously you think you matter. If you didnt why would you say that you were here to address what you see as a problem?

What? I fail to see your line of reasoning here. If you didn't think you mattered then you wouldn't be here addressing what you see as a problem either. So what's your point?

"You always talk about whites as a race. That is precisely the problem and why I'm here".

I'm not here so much because you talk about the white race, I'm here because, as I said, you always talk about the white race.

You and IM2 seem to think that white racism is the answer or explanation for any and every race issue.

"A black guy spit on you? What did you do to him? Doesn't matter, he's angry about white racism."
"Oh, you didn't mistreat him? Well, uh, he's angry about white racism."
"Rwandans massacred each other? Chalk that one up to white racism."
"They raped little girls? Chalk that one up to white racism too."
"The Tutsis agreed with the laws that oppressed the Hutus and participated in their enforcement and practice just like whites did in America? White racism.
"A black guy assassinated police officers? White racism."
"A black guy assaults a cop and gets shot trying to take his gun from him? What racism."
"A black man...white racism."
"A black woman...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."

ad infinitum.

If your question was just rhetorical you should state that so everyone knows its rhetorical.

What difference does that make if you were never going to answer it in the first place?

I'm definitely going to give you shit about your opinions that are wrong. Thats what I do here.

Obviously you think you matter...

Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?

"In my case, I go even further..."

I am pointing out your criteria is terribly inadequate and mine is more comprehensive. You only saw the same words as did I. To come to the conclusion that he was being racist is foolish. You simply need more context. Your ignorance in this regard has been highlighted by your question.

Let me ask you: Did you even read the guy's post? I'm betting you did not. If you did not read the entire quote for context as I did then fuck off with your pseudo-grammarian bullshit.

Here is the professor's facebook post in its entirety:

"OK, officially, I now hate white people. I am white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them -- us -- us out of my neighborhood? I just went to Harlem Shake on 124 and Lenox for a Classic burger to go, that would be my dinner, and the place is overrun by little Caucasian assholes (talking about white children here) who know their parents will approve of anything they do. Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you unlikely moron. Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white. I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know, it’s about my access to dinner. Fuck you, too.”

He faced an investigation from the university and facebook removed the post for violating their standards on hate speech. So you tell me.

Yeah just like I thought. You neglected to provide context. You were missing crucial data with which to make a informed decision. I reality you were ignorant like I suspected all along.

After a professor wrote about hating white people, Rutgers considers the limits of free speech

"Livingston told university officials that he was writing satirically, that his words weren’t a true expression of racism, and that he had a right to express his opinions, according to a copy of the investigation that he shared with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education."

What the fuck did you think the guy was going to say when questioned about it by his employers after saying nasty shit like that about children? Of course he's going to try to justify it or play it down.

The definition of "satire" from Webster's:

1: A literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule and scorn.
2: Trenchant wit, irony or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly.

So which of these do you think this guy feels that being white falls under, vice or folly?

You know what's funny? I never even said the guy was racist and it wasn't the point of my post to IM2. He said to me that people like me ostracize people critical of whites and that we accuse them of "...teaching people to hate whites, accused of teaching whites to hate themselves, accused of forcing whites to feel guilty about things they did not do even as they continue doing them and all manner of things". So I gave him two examples of white people expressing disdain for the white race - the professor and Chelsea Handler - and said they were examples of "anti-white rhetoric" from whites. I never said the guy was racist.

Later on IM2 said: "This claim that teaching whites not to be racist is anti while is a weakness and it is a show of immoral character within the white race."

My response: "How does 'I now hate white people' teach whites not to be racist?"

IM2: "Probably because hating something doesnt mean you are racist."

Me: "And if he had said: 'I now hate black people.', would you still say it doesn't mean he is racist?" To which I never got an answer.

When I told you about the it, I simply used the exchange as an example of my debating technique of asking questions. That's it.

You know what's even more pathetically hilarious about all this? You would know all this if you had bothered to "go further" and read the fucking context.

I thought he was going to give an explanation for his words which he did. You obviously dont want to believe what he said because you want him to be racist.

Again, I did not say the guy was racist. Jesus, why can't you pay attention to what is said to you?

I actually don't think the guy is racist or at the very least, I simply don't know. I just think he got caught up in the anti-white tide sweeping the country. It is morally de rigueur today to be critical of whites and everybody's jumping on the bandwagon. And they're jumping on the bandwagon because the implication is that if you do not, you're racist.

I think the options you present are limiting and I will not be bound by them. I submit this definition for your consideration.

sat·ire
/ˈsaˌtī(ə)r/
noun

1. the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

So this one adds the words "humor"and "exaggeration", so what? All this definition does is expand on the ways to ridicule or criticize a stupidity, vice or folly. What satire is used for in this definition is no different than Webster's.

I'm sorry but I don't buy that he called children "assholes" and "shitheads" out of satire.

You implied he was racist. We know because you tried to claim that if he said it using "Black people" instead of "white people" it would be racist.

WRONG. Once again I have to correct you on what I actually said. I asked IM2 if he would consider the guy racist if he had said black instead of white.[/quote]

 

[Asclepias]

That being said, we will never truly eliminate racism from our society until we stop deriving our identity and self-worth from our group and begin celebrating our individuality.

Bullshit. We won't get rid of racism until whites stop making punk ass excuses like the one you just made and do what is necessary to rid racism from your communities.

The one on the right is racist.

 

[Asclepias]

You keep contradicting yourself. You just got through saying you already knew the answer to my question. Why would you need clarification?

"I did know the answer to the question."

Clarification for you. I knew the answer and I knew you wouldn't. I know you meant all whites and the point was to get you to see that.

I cant deflect from something you brought up that I never mentioned. You brought up the deflection. I just refused to be deflected.

Whether or not you brought it up or I did is irrelevant, you refused to answer a question.

Obviously you think you matter. If you didnt why would you say that you were here to address what you see as a problem?

What? I fail to see your line of reasoning here. If you didn't think you mattered then you wouldn't be here addressing what you see as a problem either. So what's your point?

"You always talk about whites as a race. That is precisely the problem and why I'm here".

I'm not here so much because you talk about the white race, I'm here because, as I said, you always talk about the white race.

You and IM2 seem to think that white racism is the answer or explanation for any and every race issue.

"A black guy spit on you? What did you do to him? Doesn't matter, he's angry about white racism."
"Oh, you didn't mistreat him? Well, uh, he's angry about white racism."
"Rwandans massacred each other? Chalk that one up to white racism."
"They raped little girls? Chalk that one up to white racism too."
"The Tutsis agreed with the laws that oppressed the Hutus and participated in their enforcement and practice just like whites did in America? White racism.
"A black guy assassinated police officers? White racism."
"A black guy assaults a cop and gets shot trying to take his gun from him? What racism."
"A black man...white racism."
"A black woman...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."

ad infinitum.

If your question was just rhetorical you should state that so everyone knows its rhetorical.

What difference does that make if you were never going to answer it in the first place?

I'm definitely going to give you shit about your opinions that are wrong. Thats what I do here.

Obviously you think you matter...

Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?

"In my case, I go even further..."

I am pointing out your criteria is terribly inadequate and mine is more comprehensive. You only saw the same words as did I. To come to the conclusion that he was being racist is foolish. You simply need more context. Your ignorance in this regard has been highlighted by your question.

Let me ask you: Did you even read the guy's post? I'm betting you did not. If you did not read the entire quote for context as I did then fuck off with your pseudo-grammarian bullshit.

Here is the professor's facebook post in its entirety:

"OK, officially, I now hate white people. I am white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them -- us -- us out of my neighborhood? I just went to Harlem Shake on 124 and Lenox for a Classic burger to go, that would be my dinner, and the place is overrun by little Caucasian assholes (talking about white children here) who know their parents will approve of anything they do. Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you unlikely moron. Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white. I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know, it’s about my access to dinner. Fuck you, too.”

He faced an investigation from the university and facebook removed the post for violating their standards on hate speech. So you tell me.

That doesnt even make any sense. I know what I said. Why would I need clarification for myself? Face it. You got caught contradicting yourself.

You got caught not answering a simple question.

Do you or do you not think it is important to know if when a white person says something negative about blacks whether he's talking about a few or the whole race? Isn't that what racial issues are all about when you get down to where the rubber meets the road: judging an entire race by their skin color or by the acts of a few? Isn't that partly why you're here?

Of course I refused to answer your deflection. I didnt give you permission to deflect.

Hah!

Now youre lying. I dont just talk about white people. Just because I triggered you on something I said doesnt mean its the only thing I talk about. It just happens to be the subject you were triggered on.

No lying here. I didn't say you only talk about the white race, I said you always talk about the white race.

Basically white racism is the ultimate cause of any racial issue. If you disagree with that youre going to have to do more than just denying it to change that fact.

No, it is not. White racism was not the cause behind the black guy spitting on me.
White racism was not behind the decorative cotton display at Hobby Lobby.
White racism is not behind white people wearing dreadlocks.
White racism is not behind every police officer shooting of a black person.
White racism was not behind the cops being called on the two guys at Starbucks.

Face it, people all over this country, blacks and whites both, are seeing racists and racism everywhere. It's becoming an epidemic if it hasn't already. I'm waiting for another college professor or celebrity to tell us that Lucky Charms are racist because there's a white guy on the box.

It makes a huge difference. I wouldnt think you were an idiot that needed to deflect. If you have rhetorical question inform me so I dont have to guess every time you ask a question.

Again, why does it matter? If you don't like the question for whatever reason, you're not going to answer it, rhetorical or not.

Of course I matter. What made you think I didnt?

Nothing. You had just said the same thing to me so I threw it back at you.

If my thinking that I matter was relevant to you or the discussion to a degree that you felt the need to bring it up, then why is it a non-issue in your case?

In that specific case I couldnt go any further than you. There was no more information since I wasnt there and didnt have his history. You were content with claiming him a racist off meager data.

I didn't claim it off meager data, I claimed it off the entire post which I just showed you. You assumed I made a kneejerk judgment because I only quoted one line from it.

I require more than that before I accuse someone of being a racist. Do you see now why I think youre an idiot? How did you not know I was speaking in general terms when I said "In my case I go further....". Did you understand the context of my comment?

Maybe I missed something but I interpreted your remark to mean that you go further by reading for context before making a judgment. Is this not what you meant?

Yeah I still need context. Maybe you should provide the link instead of claiming thats his entire post.

I'll provide the link if you want it but I didn't "claim" it was the entire post, it actually was the entire post and I told you it was.

Since you apparently now think me a liar, here's the link to the article talking about it. They even have a pic of the screenshot of the facebook post itself:

Professor accused of antiwhite racism; others say it's free speech

Seems to me he has a sense of humor. When say I hate Black people I am always joking or being sarcastic. I'm Black so why would I hate myself? If that angers you then I suggest you seek counseling.

So you think calling children "little Caucasian assholes", "Little shithead" and "Unlikely moron" is humorous?

I didnt get caught not answering your deflection. I pointed out that I wasnt going to answer it when I replied.

I know you did. But you still refused to answer.

Thing is, you would do the exact same thing to me if you thought I was painting all blacks with a broad brush. If I had said something like "Blacks are paranoid about racism and see it everywhere", you would do one of two things: Ask me if I meant all blacks or just assume that I was.

Are you asking me to refrain from talking about the white race? Why should I stop doing that when they are the only cause of the racism I point out to my Black people?

Nope, not what I'm saying. I already told you I don't so much have a problem with you talking about the white race. The problem is (as I also already pointed out), you always talk about the white race and your attitude is that white racism is behind every race issue and incident. It is not.

When I related my story of black racism, IM2 assumed I lied and made it up because I'm white. Even after I gave him all the details that he asked for, such as did I mistreat him or chastise him in front of other crewmembers and I said no to all these questions, he had nowhere else to go so it was like "Well, uh, he's angry about white racism and besides, blacks can't be racist so nyaaah!"

The point is, white racism was not behind this guy's spitting on me. Paranoia, hate, and just plain being an asshole was behind it.

I disagree. Anything that happens racially in this country is ultimately due to white racism. You whites made up the races and the concept that the white race was the best. You own that no matter how much you want to deny it. Sorry.

Nope, I don't own it because I never said it, thought it or agreed with it.

Again I disagree. If your question is irrelevant or not allowed I wont answer. Some things are just none of your business. It matters that you ID your question as rhetorical. I dont want to think youre stupid just because you asked a rhetorical question.

Horseshit. You already thought I was an idiot long before this discussion.

It never was a non issue in my case. I typically correct people that think they matter. The only people that do matter are myself and those that are close to me or working towards the same goal as I am. Thats a serious issue.

You think you matter but you correct people who think they matter? You're either colossally arrogant or collossally stupid.

I assumed you made your misinformed decision off that post you showed me which I pointed out has no historical context and you werent there to see the body language. To make matters worse you completely forgot to evaluate this guys explanation of the whole thing which pointed out your flawed decision making process with laser like precision.

*sigh* I already explained this to you. I READ THE ENTIRE POST before I made my assessment. I just didn't quote the entire thing in my original post to IM2.

Thats exactly what I meant. If you knew thats what I meant how did you fuck it up so badly? I was speaking generally and you tried to pretend I was not.

I don't even know what you're talking about when you say you were speaking generally. Generally about what? You said you "go even further" to ascertain context. I pointed out that you couldn't go any further than me because we see the same text. That's when you asked "Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?" I reminded you of what you said and now here we are.

No it wasnt the entire post. He made another post and your link even shows that. See what I mean about you working with incomplete data?

If it was another post then that means it was a separate post, correct? That means I didn't post both of them but the one I did post contained the text from the entire post, right? See what I mean when I talk about critical thinking? Besides, if you read the second post then you must know that it was just more anti-white bullshit. He didn't apologize. He didn't explain it. He just dished out more of it.

Since he didnt point out any specific kid I find it hilarious.

I sincerely wish you were kidding. But alas, 'twas ever thus with you.

If you know I did why did you claim to catch me not answering the question? Obviously you didnt catch me. I pointed it out to you.

I strongly disagree. Whites made up racism. I always talk about them to make sure people like you dont lie and say the issue is not white people. You cant begin to overcome racism if you dont understand the roots of it. White people lie about racism and try to blame Black people for it when Black people are the ones most affected negatively by it. I guarantee you the reason any Black guy would spit on you is due to that Black guy being angry about white racism.

I dont mean you specifically. Youre nobody in the big scheme of things. I am talking about the racial group you belong to.

I suspected you were an idiot at first. The final decision has not been made so you still have a chance at redemption. If the final decision had been made I wouldnt waste time answering all your statements.

Its amusing when white people call me arrogant. Evidently confidence in a Black guy is threatening. Confidence is not arrogance.

You didnt read the entire post. If you had then you wouldnt have had a problem with what he said.

I was speaking generally about whites. Again you seem to have some reading comprehension issues as I have mentioned this several times. I dont care what you pointed out because I agreed we read the same post. That had nothing to do with my statement about speaking generally. You made a decision after reading that post while I found more posts and quotes before making my decision.

Only a simpleton wouldnt look for more information before making a decision. This is why I say your decision making process is flawed. Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled.

Sorry. I am not kidding. No specific kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

 

[Asclepias]

You keep contradicting yourself. You just got through saying you already knew the answer to my question. Why would you need clarification?

"I did know the answer to the question."

Clarification for you. I knew the answer and I knew you wouldn't. I know you meant all whites and the point was to get you to see that.

I cant deflect from something you brought up that I never mentioned. You brought up the deflection. I just refused to be deflected.

Whether or not you brought it up or I did is irrelevant, you refused to answer a question.

Obviously you think you matter. If you didnt why would you say that you were here to address what you see as a problem?

What? I fail to see your line of reasoning here. If you didn't think you mattered then you wouldn't be here addressing what you see as a problem either. So what's your point?

"You always talk about whites as a race. That is precisely the problem and why I'm here".

I'm not here so much because you talk about the white race, I'm here because, as I said, you always talk about the white race.

You and IM2 seem to think that white racism is the answer or explanation for any and every race issue.

"A black guy spit on you? What did you do to him? Doesn't matter, he's angry about white racism."
"Oh, you didn't mistreat him? Well, uh, he's angry about white racism."
"Rwandans massacred each other? Chalk that one up to white racism."
"They raped little girls? Chalk that one up to white racism too."
"The Tutsis agreed with the laws that oppressed the Hutus and participated in their enforcement and practice just like whites did in America? White racism.
"A black guy assassinated police officers? White racism."
"A black guy assaults a cop and gets shot trying to take his gun from him? What racism."
"A black man...white racism."
"A black woman...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."

ad infinitum.

If your question was just rhetorical you should state that so everyone knows its rhetorical.

What difference does that make if you were never going to answer it in the first place?

I'm definitely going to give you shit about your opinions that are wrong. Thats what I do here.

Obviously you think you matter...

Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?

"In my case, I go even further..."

I am pointing out your criteria is terribly inadequate and mine is more comprehensive. You only saw the same words as did I. To come to the conclusion that he was being racist is foolish. You simply need more context. Your ignorance in this regard has been highlighted by your question.

Let me ask you: Did you even read the guy's post? I'm betting you did not. If you did not read the entire quote for context as I did then fuck off with your pseudo-grammarian bullshit.

Here is the professor's facebook post in its entirety:

"OK, officially, I now hate white people. I am white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them -- us -- us out of my neighborhood? I just went to Harlem Shake on 124 and Lenox for a Classic burger to go, that would be my dinner, and the place is overrun by little Caucasian assholes (talking about white children here) who know their parents will approve of anything they do. Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you unlikely moron. Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white. I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know, it’s about my access to dinner. Fuck you, too.”

He faced an investigation from the university and facebook removed the post for violating their standards on hate speech. So you tell me.

Yeah just like I thought. You neglected to provide context. You were missing crucial data with which to make a informed decision. I reality you were ignorant like I suspected all along.

After a professor wrote about hating white people, Rutgers considers the limits of free speech

"Livingston told university officials that he was writing satirically, that his words weren’t a true expression of racism, and that he had a right to express his opinions, according to a copy of the investigation that he shared with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education."

What the fuck did you think the guy was going to say when questioned about it by his employers after saying nasty shit like that about children? Of course he's going to try to justify it or play it down.

The definition of "satire" from Webster's:

1: A literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule and scorn.
2: Trenchant wit, irony or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly.

So which of these do you think this guy feels that being white falls under, vice or folly?

You know what's funny? I never even said the guy was racist and it wasn't the point of my post to IM2. He said to me that people like me ostracize people critical of whites and that we accuse them of "...teaching people to hate whites, accused of teaching whites to hate themselves, accused of forcing whites to feel guilty about things they did not do even as they continue doing them and all manner of things". So I gave him two examples of white people expressing disdain for the white race - the professor and Chelsea Handler - and said they were examples of "anti-white rhetoric" from whites. I never said the guy was racist.

Later on IM2 said: "This claim that teaching whites not to be racist is anti while is a weakness and it is a show of immoral character within the white race."

My response: "How does 'I now hate white people' teach whites not to be racist?"

IM2: "Probably because hating something doesnt mean you are racist."

Me: "And if he had said: 'I now hate black people.', would you still say it doesn't mean he is racist?" To which I never got an answer.

When I told you about the it, I simply used the exchange as an example of my debating technique of asking questions. That's it.

You know what's even more pathetically hilarious about all this? You would know all this if you had bothered to "go further" and read the fucking context.

I thought he was going to give an explanation for his words which he did. You obviously dont want to believe what he said because you want him to be racist.

Again, I did not say the guy was racist. Jesus, why can't you pay attention to what is said to you?

I actually don't think the guy is racist or at the very least, I simply don't know. I just think he got caught up in the anti-white tide sweeping the country. It is morally de rigueur today to be critical of whites and everybody's jumping on the bandwagon. And they're jumping on the bandwagon because the implication is that if you do not, you're racist.

I think the options you present are limiting and I will not be bound by them. I submit this definition for your consideration.

sat·ire
/ˈsaˌtī(ə)r/
noun

1. the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

So this one adds the words "humor"and "exaggeration", so what? All this definition does is expand on the ways to ridicule or criticize a stupidity, vice or folly. What satire is used for in this definition is no different than Webster's.

I'm sorry but I don't buy that he called children "assholes" and "shitheads" out of satire.

You implied he was racist. We know because you tried to claim that if he said it using "Black people" instead of "white people" it would be racist.

WRONG. Once again I have to correct you on what I actually said. I asked IM2 if he would consider the guy racist if he had said black instead of white.

Again you implied the guy was racist. I posted your quote asking if the guy would be considered racist if he had said this about Black people. No one claimed the white guy was racist. Evidently you considered him to be racist or you would never have made the comparison. Here is your question. Its pretty obvious you were trying to justify thinking he was a racist because of what he said about whites and trying to get IM2 to agree with you.


"And if he had said: "I now hate black people.", would you still say it doesn't mean he is racist?"

What do you mean so what? If it was done in humor then it wasnt racist. Thats so what. This dude is a white dude. He can joke about his own race without it being racist.

See above. I have already exposed you believed the white guy was racist. If you didnt then you would have never asked if it was racist if he had said "Black guy" instead of "white guy".

 

[Asclepias]

"The blacks of the past who were told they were inferior did not stand up and say they were superior, they said they were equal. And they were right."

They were more than equal. They were superior and they knew it. I know because they passed it down to my generation. Whites would have died out under the conditions Blacks dealt with. Blacks didnt have to legislate themselves a head start in order to advance. Whites did that. Blacks didnt have to claim whites were not human to appease their insecurity complexes. Whites did that. That tells Black people that Blacks are superior to whites. Some are uncomfortable with that notion but in their bones they know this to be true. Now I dont know if that superiority is organic or just a result of whites weakening themselves through their culture.

If your argument is that the inferior race was whites and they had to legistlate an advantage, doesn't that make them superior ( as they were smart enough to come up with a strategy ensuring their survival?) I mean human beings are much weaker physically than many species on the planet but our intelligence ensures our survival, so we discovered fire, weapons etc to our benefit, making us the dominant species. Your argument is racist and illogical.

No that doesnt make them superior. That makes them decidedly inferior. If whites were superior they would have needed zero legislation or any kind of advantage to out succeed other races. Its like tying a handicapped kids show laces to the other shoe so you win a race. You dont hold back inferior competition. You just beat them.

So on your thinking since human beings need weapons to protect them against stronger animals, they are inferior? Superiority is an ability to secure your survival by whatever means. That is how the rich get richer and the poort get poorer. Or are you saying life is a kids' game and no one should cheat?

Correct. There is a reason we need guns and other weapons. We are inferior to a bear. You ever see what happens when a bear and a unarmed human meet? Nope. Securing your survival by any means is adaptation not superiority. Exactly. People that cheat are weak and need a crutch.

A crutch like, say, white people are the weaker race?

No that wouldnt be a crutch. That would be an explanation of the reason white people concentrated their energy on creating a system of racism. They couldnt compete and knew this instinctively so they had to cheat.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Do you see what I'm getting at? A lot of the stuff that IM2 and Asclepias spout on here is no different than rhetoric spouted by white racists. It's not raising awareness of racism or seeking justice or any noble idea such as that. It's just more of the same.

You ever heard the axiom "for every action there is an equal and opposite reaction"?

Have you ever heard the axiom "Hate begets hate"? Or "Two wrongs don't make a right"?

You're viewing the reaction to being abused, exploited and subjugated to unspeakable indignities and human rights violations to whatever motivated the white racists to put this scheme into motion in the first place. They are not the same, nor are they equal.

I understand that I'm viewing the reaction and I'm not disputing the reasons behind them, I'm disputing your moral rationale behind perpetuating hate. Are you telling me that racism is the solution to racism? If that's what you're saying then where does it end?

And it is a character flaw, a moral failing or whatever you want to call it, to do the things that were done to people of African descent in the U.S. but what made it particularly heinous is the fact that the white racists made this abuse the law of the land.

You're right, it is a character flaw. But it is a character flaw of human nature, not race. To expand on this, slavery and racism were/are a moral failure of culture, not race. If it was a character flaw of race then slavery would not have been outlawed and blacks would still not have the right to vote or the same civil liberties or equal employment opportunity and would still be widely viewed as inferior.

Race cannot be changed but culture can be. Whites will always be white and blacks will always be black but white culture has changed dramatically since then in the acceptance of the fundamental sameness of the two races. Is there a ways to go yet? Yes. But even you cannot deny that white culture has changed drastically in its attitude towards blacks from a hundred years ago.

So they protected themselves with "the law" while denying the same protection to those they exploited. And even the people who didn't directly put the laws into place but participated in the abusive racist behavior are just as much at fault as the original racists were, up to and including the white racists that are still going around engaging in racist behavior in 2018. They never stopped, had a change of heart nor do I expect them to ever to change during my lifetime. Everyday we hear about a new idiotic incident of white racists gone wild doing stupid and unlawful things.

And what about those who did not participate in the abusive racist behavior?

 

[OldLady]

They learned these things from whites.
You do know that isn't true, right?

You have a lot of good information and strong arguments to share, and then you blow it straight out of the water with shit like that. Humans are predators. Some are peaceful and forward thinking, fortunately, in every race and in every country. Some are not.

Its true. Before whites arrived they respected each others boudaries. Now that whites have entered the dynamic some places in Africa are constantly at war due to ideas and money introduced by whites. Show me one conflict in Africa that doesnt have white people behind it. Just one.

Not sure what being a predator has to do with this? Tigers are predators and they dont go around causing the problems that white people do.

Being a predator has everything to do with it. It kills to eat. In human circles, that is kill to be in charge. Africans were not respecting each other's boundaries, A., they were into battles with their neighbors, taking slaves, booty, etc. long before white Europeans arrived.
A tribe of them even took over the Egyptian dynasty for a short while, didn't they?

As for fighting now, you know more about it than I do, but blaming the instinct to kill on white people alone? That's not right.

Africans respected the boundaries of other Africans before whites carved up Africa. Anything else is a lie told by white historians who wanted to use that as an excuse. They say the same thing about the NAs. What occurred in Egypt was in house. Brothers will fight among themselves in most cases. It wasnt a tribe. It was the Nubian empire that ruled Egypt for a while. This happened on several occasions simply because the Nubians were the first Egyptians.

Alright, if you are going to call anything in the historical record a lie, I guess there's no sense talking to you.
Believe what you will.

Old lady, this historical record of Africa includes colonization by whites which divided nations into borders that did not exist and put warring tribes next to each other, white rulers that used divide and conquer in order to maintain minority rule. Much of the strife in Africa today can be traced to colonization. You guys her are so busy arguing trying top make us racists rather than discussing the points being made. What A is saying is that what is going on now whites created. Most of you guys want to go way back to 100,000 BC in order to argue about issues to rationalize what whites have done until we start bringing up how the past benefitted whites today then for most of you guys here 100 years ago is too far in the past. Stop doing that please.

IM, A is the one who brought up pre-colonial Africa by saying that prior to whites invading Africa, Africans respected each others' boundaries and didn't war with each other.
I already said, in my reply to A, that you folks know more about current conflicts in Africa than I do, what caused them, etc. I was never speaking to current conflicts. I was speaking only to the ridiculous notion that as a race, Africans were peaceful until the bad white guys taught them to be aggressors. Sorry, that's bullshit.

I can see A being somewhat suspicious of white historians' account of what African empires were like pre white guys, but I think it is ludicrous to imagine that blacks are any more likely to be peaceniks, as a race, than any other. He mentioned Native Americans as being peaceable, too. But we know the Mayan and Aztec empires, to name two, didn't become tens of thousands strong by simply smiling at their neighbors. They sacrificed their prisoners of war; no white guy made that up--it is what archeologists have figured out.

All humans have the potential for violence; some cultures learn to control it. I'm not saying some black cultures weren't peaceful, but so were some white cultures. And probably over the course of time, they got gobbled up by aggressive neighbors. That's how history goes.
So, sorry, but I have no plans to "stop" making that point. Though there's no sense, I realize, trying to make any point here.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Clarification for you. I knew the answer and I knew you wouldn't. I know you meant all whites and the point was to get you to see that.

Whether or not you brought it up or I did is irrelevant, you refused to answer a question.

What? I fail to see your line of reasoning here. If you didn't think you mattered then you wouldn't be here addressing what you see as a problem either. So what's your point?

I'm not here so much because you talk about the white race, I'm here because, as I said, you always talk about the white race.

You and IM2 seem to think that white racism is the answer or explanation for any and every race issue.

"A black guy spit on you? What did you do to him? Doesn't matter, he's angry about white racism."
"Oh, you didn't mistreat him? Well, uh, he's angry about white racism."
"Rwandans massacred each other? Chalk that one up to white racism."
"They raped little girls? Chalk that one up to white racism too."
"The Tutsis agreed with the laws that oppressed the Hutus and participated in their enforcement and practice just like whites did in America? White racism.
"A black guy assassinated police officers? White racism."
"A black guy assaults a cop and gets shot trying to take his gun from him? What racism."
"A black man...white racism."
"A black woman...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."

ad infinitum.

What difference does that make if you were never going to answer it in the first place?

Obviously you think you matter...

"In my case, I go even further..."

Let me ask you: Did you even read the guy's post? I'm betting you did not. If you did not read the entire quote for context as I did then fuck off with your pseudo-grammarian bullshit.

Here is the professor's facebook post in its entirety:

"OK, officially, I now hate white people. I am white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them -- us -- us out of my neighborhood? I just went to Harlem Shake on 124 and Lenox for a Classic burger to go, that would be my dinner, and the place is overrun by little Caucasian assholes (talking about white children here) who know their parents will approve of anything they do. Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you unlikely moron. Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white. I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know, it’s about my access to dinner. Fuck you, too.”

He faced an investigation from the university and facebook removed the post for violating their standards on hate speech. So you tell me.

That doesnt even make any sense. I know what I said. Why would I need clarification for myself? Face it. You got caught contradicting yourself.

You got caught not answering a simple question.

Do you or do you not think it is important to know if when a white person says something negative about blacks whether he's talking about a few or the whole race? Isn't that what racial issues are all about when you get down to where the rubber meets the road: judging an entire race by their skin color or by the acts of a few? Isn't that partly why you're here?

Of course I refused to answer your deflection. I didnt give you permission to deflect.

Hah!

Now youre lying. I dont just talk about white people. Just because I triggered you on something I said doesnt mean its the only thing I talk about. It just happens to be the subject you were triggered on.

No lying here. I didn't say you only talk about the white race, I said you always talk about the white race.

Basically white racism is the ultimate cause of any racial issue. If you disagree with that youre going to have to do more than just denying it to change that fact.

No, it is not. White racism was not the cause behind the black guy spitting on me.
White racism was not behind the decorative cotton display at Hobby Lobby.
White racism is not behind white people wearing dreadlocks.
White racism is not behind every police officer shooting of a black person.
White racism was not behind the cops being called on the two guys at Starbucks.

Face it, people all over this country, blacks and whites both, are seeing racists and racism everywhere. It's becoming an epidemic if it hasn't already. I'm waiting for another college professor or celebrity to tell us that Lucky Charms are racist because there's a white guy on the box.

It makes a huge difference. I wouldnt think you were an idiot that needed to deflect. If you have rhetorical question inform me so I dont have to guess every time you ask a question.

Again, why does it matter? If you don't like the question for whatever reason, you're not going to answer it, rhetorical or not.

Of course I matter. What made you think I didnt?

Nothing. You had just said the same thing to me so I threw it back at you.

If my thinking that I matter was relevant to you or the discussion to a degree that you felt the need to bring it up, then why is it a non-issue in your case?

In that specific case I couldnt go any further than you. There was no more information since I wasnt there and didnt have his history. You were content with claiming him a racist off meager data.

I didn't claim it off meager data, I claimed it off the entire post which I just showed you. You assumed I made a kneejerk judgment because I only quoted one line from it.

I require more than that before I accuse someone of being a racist. Do you see now why I think youre an idiot? How did you not know I was speaking in general terms when I said "In my case I go further....". Did you understand the context of my comment?

Maybe I missed something but I interpreted your remark to mean that you go further by reading for context before making a judgment. Is this not what you meant?

Yeah I still need context. Maybe you should provide the link instead of claiming thats his entire post.

I'll provide the link if you want it but I didn't "claim" it was the entire post, it actually was the entire post and I told you it was.

Since you apparently now think me a liar, here's the link to the article talking about it. They even have a pic of the screenshot of the facebook post itself:

Professor accused of antiwhite racism; others say it's free speech

Seems to me he has a sense of humor. When say I hate Black people I am always joking or being sarcastic. I'm Black so why would I hate myself? If that angers you then I suggest you seek counseling.

So you think calling children "little Caucasian assholes", "Little shithead" and "Unlikely moron" is humorous?

I didnt get caught not answering your deflection. I pointed out that I wasnt going to answer it when I replied.

I know you did. But you still refused to answer.

Thing is, you would do the exact same thing to me if you thought I was painting all blacks with a broad brush. If I had said something like "Blacks are paranoid about racism and see it everywhere", you would do one of two things: Ask me if I meant all blacks or just assume that I was.

Are you asking me to refrain from talking about the white race? Why should I stop doing that when they are the only cause of the racism I point out to my Black people?

Nope, not what I'm saying. I already told you I don't so much have a problem with you talking about the white race. The problem is (as I also already pointed out), you always talk about the white race and your attitude is that white racism is behind every race issue and incident. It is not.

When I related my story of black racism, IM2 assumed I lied and made it up because I'm white. Even after I gave him all the details that he asked for, such as did I mistreat him or chastise him in front of other crewmembers and I said no to all these questions, he had nowhere else to go so it was like "Well, uh, he's angry about white racism and besides, blacks can't be racist so nyaaah!"

The point is, white racism was not behind this guy's spitting on me. Paranoia, hate, and just plain being an asshole was behind it.

I disagree. Anything that happens racially in this country is ultimately due to white racism. You whites made up the races and the concept that the white race was the best. You own that no matter how much you want to deny it. Sorry.

Nope, I don't own it because I never said it, thought it or agreed with it.

Again I disagree. If your question is irrelevant or not allowed I wont answer. Some things are just none of your business. It matters that you ID your question as rhetorical. I dont want to think youre stupid just because you asked a rhetorical question.

Horseshit. You already thought I was an idiot long before this discussion.

It never was a non issue in my case. I typically correct people that think they matter. The only people that do matter are myself and those that are close to me or working towards the same goal as I am. Thats a serious issue.

You think you matter but you correct people who think they matter? You're either colossally arrogant or collossally stupid.

I assumed you made your misinformed decision off that post you showed me which I pointed out has no historical context and you werent there to see the body language. To make matters worse you completely forgot to evaluate this guys explanation of the whole thing which pointed out your flawed decision making process with laser like precision.

*sigh* I already explained this to you. I READ THE ENTIRE POST before I made my assessment. I just didn't quote the entire thing in my original post to IM2.

Thats exactly what I meant. If you knew thats what I meant how did you fuck it up so badly? I was speaking generally and you tried to pretend I was not.

I don't even know what you're talking about when you say you were speaking generally. Generally about what? You said you "go even further" to ascertain context. I pointed out that you couldn't go any further than me because we see the same text. That's when you asked "Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?" I reminded you of what you said and now here we are.

No it wasnt the entire post. He made another post and your link even shows that. See what I mean about you working with incomplete data?

If it was another post then that means it was a separate post, correct? That means I didn't post both of them but the one I did post contained the text from the entire post, right? See what I mean when I talk about critical thinking? Besides, if you read the second post then you must know that it was just more anti-white bullshit. He didn't apologize. He didn't explain it. He just dished out more of it.

Since he didnt point out any specific kid I find it hilarious.

I sincerely wish you were kidding. But alas, 'twas ever thus with you.

If you know I did why did you claim to catch me not answering the question? Obviously you didnt catch me. I pointed it out to you.

We can quibble about this for the next week but the fact is, you refused to answer a simple question and justified it by calling it an attempt at deflection. You knew full well that to answer it either way would have put you in the uncomfortable position of having to backtrack and either qualify your remarks or double down on them, thus essentially saying that no whites have ever endeavored to end racism, which you knew was bullshit and everybody else does too.

You also failed to answer my following questions. Do you not think it's important to ascertain whether a white person making derogatory remarks about blacks means a particular group of blacks or the black race in general? Do you not think that this should be the first step in enlightening those with racist views?

I strongly disagree.

You can disagree with the strength of Samson but it still doesn't mean you're right.

Whites made up racism. I always talk about them to make sure people like you dont lie and say the issue is not white people.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

You cant begin to overcome racism if you dont understand the roots of it. White people lie about racism and try to blame Black people for it when Black people are the ones most affected negatively by it. I guarantee you the reason any Black guy would spit on you is due to that Black guy being angry about white racism.

Obviously he was angry about white racism. The question is, why was he angry at me?

You guys keep telling me he was angry about white racism but the one thing you haven't done is to show that he was right and justified for doing so. If I never treated him in a condescending manner and was always respectful, was he right and justified for spitting on me?

I suspected you were an idiot at first. The final decision has not been made so you still have a chance at redemption. If the final decision had been made I wouldnt waste time answering all your statements.

I await your final judgment with bated breath...

Its amusing when white people call me arrogant. Evidently confidence in a Black guy is threatening. Confidence is not arrogance.

Saying you matter and that certain others don't is not confidence, it's egotistical arrogant bullshit.

Real confidence comes from knowing you matter as much as everyone else.

You didnt read the entire post. If you had then you wouldnt have had a problem with what he said.

I read both posts and I had a problem with both of them. You're not stupid and you read both of them too so you know as well as I do that, though the rhetoric was toned down a little in the second post, the sentiment was the same as the first. Namely, disdain for whites and white children in particular and a desire for them to "return to the suburbs".

I was speaking generally about whites. Again you seem to have some reading comprehension issues as I have mentioned this several times. I dont care what you pointed out because I agreed we read the same post. That had nothing to do with my statement about speaking generally. You made a decision after reading that post while I found more posts and quotes before making my decision.

You mean these?:

"I've just been told by FB that my rant v, white people makes me dangerous, socially media speaking, even though I'm a white people, or person, or whatever. But if the question is, what is less than white, only Herrman Melville need apply. and only Moby Dick can answer. But then they're a white whale. Let's ask Benito!"

Don't ask me what the fuck he's talking about in that one.

"FB won't let me post about the mostly hilarious email and messages I've received since Friday, roughly 30 announcing that I'm the racist, not them, three promising bodily harm. One guy even left me a phone message, which I took as a warm and personal approach to the matter. And the designations! "Racist Fuckstain" is my fave so far. Let's see if this goes through."

"Chris Knight and Jay Bandu have alerted me to last week's WNBC segment on my FB rant--two reporters asking passersby what they thought of a professor who hates white people! The interesting thing here, for my purposes, is that the "mainstream" media are just as eager as the alt-right outlets to discredit the pointy-heads in the ivory tower. It's not a vast right-wing conspiracy, in this sense, it's a conspiracy of dunces competing for the same audience."

"I meet tomorrow at noon--face-to-face, at Harlem Shake--with a guy who has threatened me with bodily harm because of my Facebook remarks on the question of racial identity. He calls himself, or rather his handle is, "Beefy Tips." Can't wait to meet him."

"If you want to see me pontificate after my wait for the no-show moron at Harlem Shake, dial into WPIX-TV on line. There you will see me impatiently explaining why reverse racism is a red herring. 98% of the hate mail I've received since 5/31 is from white supremacists. The scant remainder is from liberals who want a color-blind society. Good luck to y'all."

That last one made me laugh. Who did he think was going to send him hate mail, the Mickey Mouse Club? Of course the hate mail came from white supremacists. And here's something I'll bet he never considered: While 98% of the hate mail was from racist white supremacists, 100% of his post was racist.

Anyway, as you can see, there's no explanation or anything else from him about the post itself. All his subsequent posts were about his experiences dealing with the fallout from it. That's it.

Only a simpleton wouldnt look for more information before making a decision. This is why I say your decision making process is flawed. Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled.

Aaaand once again I have to correct you on something I've already corrected you on twice. Nobody gave me the quote. I remembered about the story, Googled it, found the article that had the full text of the post along with a screenshot of it, read the full text and then quoted the one line from it to IM2 for his edification. Got it?

Sorry. I am not kidding. No specific kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

Ah, well, in that case, black children are little negroid assholes, unlikely morons and little shitheads. No specific black kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

 

[JoeMoma]

Though there's no sense, I realize, trying to make any point here.

They will deny any "facts" that contradict their narratives. That is why I read and and write in this forum purely for entertainment purposes. Trying to have a honest discussion with these guys is pointless.

 

[IM2]

Its true. Before whites arrived they respected each others boudaries. Now that whites have entered the dynamic some places in Africa are constantly at war due to ideas and money introduced by whites. Show me one conflict in Africa that doesnt have white people behind it. Just one.

Not sure what being a predator has to do with this? Tigers are predators and they dont go around causing the problems that white people do.

Being a predator has everything to do with it. It kills to eat. In human circles, that is kill to be in charge. Africans were not respecting each other's boundaries, A., they were into battles with their neighbors, taking slaves, booty, etc. long before white Europeans arrived.
A tribe of them even took over the Egyptian dynasty for a short while, didn't they?

As for fighting now, you know more about it than I do, but blaming the instinct to kill on white people alone? That's not right.

Africans respected the boundaries of other Africans before whites carved up Africa. Anything else is a lie told by white historians who wanted to use that as an excuse. They say the same thing about the NAs. What occurred in Egypt was in house. Brothers will fight among themselves in most cases. It wasnt a tribe. It was the Nubian empire that ruled Egypt for a while. This happened on several occasions simply because the Nubians were the first Egyptians.

Alright, if you are going to call anything in the historical record a lie, I guess there's no sense talking to you.
Believe what you will.

Old lady, this historical record of Africa includes colonization by whites which divided nations into borders that did not exist and put warring tribes next to each other, white rulers that used divide and conquer in order to maintain minority rule. Much of the strife in Africa today can be traced to colonization. You guys her are so busy arguing trying top make us racists rather than discussing the points being made. What A is saying is that what is going on now whites created. Most of you guys want to go way back to 100,000 BC in order to argue about issues to rationalize what whites have done until we start bringing up how the past benefitted whites today then for most of you guys here 100 years ago is too far in the past. Stop doing that please.

IM, A is the one who brought up pre-colonial Africa by saying that prior to whites invading Africa, Africans respected each others' boundaries and didn't war with each other.
I already said, in my reply to A, that you folks know more about current conflicts in Africa than I do, what caused them, etc. I was never speaking to current conflicts. I was speaking only to the ridiculous notion that as a race, Africans were peaceful until the bad white guys taught them to be aggressors. Sorry, that's bullshit.

I can see A being somewhat suspicious of white historians' account of what African empires were like pre white guys, but I think it is ludicrous to imagine that blacks are any more likely to be peaceniks, as a race, than any other. He mentioned Native Americans as being peaceable, too. But we know the Mayan and Aztec empires, to name two, didn't become tens of thousands strong by simply smiling at their neighbors. They sacrificed their prisoners of war; no white guy made that up--it is what archeologists have figured out.

All humans have the potential for violence; some cultures learn to control it. I'm not saying some black cultures weren't peaceful, but so were some white cultures. And probably over the course of time, they got gobbled up by aggressive neighbors. That's how history goes.
So, sorry, but I have no plans to "stop" making that point. Though there's no sense, I realize, trying to make any point here.

I'm not going to argue against the fact that we all have human flaws. But what gets sickening is that most whites here always want to make the argument a what about ism in order to divert from the topic. But you have one problem with the argument you are using, find us examples where a non white nation has invaded, colonized, and occupied a white one.

 

[Asclepias]

That doesnt even make any sense. I know what I said. Why would I need clarification for myself? Face it. You got caught contradicting yourself.

You got caught not answering a simple question.

Do you or do you not think it is important to know if when a white person says something negative about blacks whether he's talking about a few or the whole race? Isn't that what racial issues are all about when you get down to where the rubber meets the road: judging an entire race by their skin color or by the acts of a few? Isn't that partly why you're here?

Of course I refused to answer your deflection. I didnt give you permission to deflect.

Hah!

Now youre lying. I dont just talk about white people. Just because I triggered you on something I said doesnt mean its the only thing I talk about. It just happens to be the subject you were triggered on.

No lying here. I didn't say you only talk about the white race, I said you always talk about the white race.

Basically white racism is the ultimate cause of any racial issue. If you disagree with that youre going to have to do more than just denying it to change that fact.

No, it is not. White racism was not the cause behind the black guy spitting on me.
White racism was not behind the decorative cotton display at Hobby Lobby.
White racism is not behind white people wearing dreadlocks.
White racism is not behind every police officer shooting of a black person.
White racism was not behind the cops being called on the two guys at Starbucks.

Face it, people all over this country, blacks and whites both, are seeing racists and racism everywhere. It's becoming an epidemic if it hasn't already. I'm waiting for another college professor or celebrity to tell us that Lucky Charms are racist because there's a white guy on the box.

It makes a huge difference. I wouldnt think you were an idiot that needed to deflect. If you have rhetorical question inform me so I dont have to guess every time you ask a question.

Again, why does it matter? If you don't like the question for whatever reason, you're not going to answer it, rhetorical or not.

Of course I matter. What made you think I didnt?

Nothing. You had just said the same thing to me so I threw it back at you.

If my thinking that I matter was relevant to you or the discussion to a degree that you felt the need to bring it up, then why is it a non-issue in your case?

In that specific case I couldnt go any further than you. There was no more information since I wasnt there and didnt have his history. You were content with claiming him a racist off meager data.

I didn't claim it off meager data, I claimed it off the entire post which I just showed you. You assumed I made a kneejerk judgment because I only quoted one line from it.

I require more than that before I accuse someone of being a racist. Do you see now why I think youre an idiot? How did you not know I was speaking in general terms when I said "In my case I go further....". Did you understand the context of my comment?

Maybe I missed something but I interpreted your remark to mean that you go further by reading for context before making a judgment. Is this not what you meant?

Yeah I still need context. Maybe you should provide the link instead of claiming thats his entire post.

I'll provide the link if you want it but I didn't "claim" it was the entire post, it actually was the entire post and I told you it was.

Since you apparently now think me a liar, here's the link to the article talking about it. They even have a pic of the screenshot of the facebook post itself:

Professor accused of antiwhite racism; others say it's free speech

Seems to me he has a sense of humor. When say I hate Black people I am always joking or being sarcastic. I'm Black so why would I hate myself? If that angers you then I suggest you seek counseling.

So you think calling children "little Caucasian assholes", "Little shithead" and "Unlikely moron" is humorous?

I didnt get caught not answering your deflection. I pointed out that I wasnt going to answer it when I replied.

I know you did. But you still refused to answer.

Thing is, you would do the exact same thing to me if you thought I was painting all blacks with a broad brush. If I had said something like "Blacks are paranoid about racism and see it everywhere", you would do one of two things: Ask me if I meant all blacks or just assume that I was.

Are you asking me to refrain from talking about the white race? Why should I stop doing that when they are the only cause of the racism I point out to my Black people?

Nope, not what I'm saying. I already told you I don't so much have a problem with you talking about the white race. The problem is (as I also already pointed out), you always talk about the white race and your attitude is that white racism is behind every race issue and incident. It is not.

When I related my story of black racism, IM2 assumed I lied and made it up because I'm white. Even after I gave him all the details that he asked for, such as did I mistreat him or chastise him in front of other crewmembers and I said no to all these questions, he had nowhere else to go so it was like "Well, uh, he's angry about white racism and besides, blacks can't be racist so nyaaah!"

The point is, white racism was not behind this guy's spitting on me. Paranoia, hate, and just plain being an asshole was behind it.

I disagree. Anything that happens racially in this country is ultimately due to white racism. You whites made up the races and the concept that the white race was the best. You own that no matter how much you want to deny it. Sorry.

Nope, I don't own it because I never said it, thought it or agreed with it.

Again I disagree. If your question is irrelevant or not allowed I wont answer. Some things are just none of your business. It matters that you ID your question as rhetorical. I dont want to think youre stupid just because you asked a rhetorical question.

Horseshit. You already thought I was an idiot long before this discussion.

It never was a non issue in my case. I typically correct people that think they matter. The only people that do matter are myself and those that are close to me or working towards the same goal as I am. Thats a serious issue.

You think you matter but you correct people who think they matter? You're either colossally arrogant or collossally stupid.

I assumed you made your misinformed decision off that post you showed me which I pointed out has no historical context and you werent there to see the body language. To make matters worse you completely forgot to evaluate this guys explanation of the whole thing which pointed out your flawed decision making process with laser like precision.

*sigh* I already explained this to you. I READ THE ENTIRE POST before I made my assessment. I just didn't quote the entire thing in my original post to IM2.

Thats exactly what I meant. If you knew thats what I meant how did you fuck it up so badly? I was speaking generally and you tried to pretend I was not.

I don't even know what you're talking about when you say you were speaking generally. Generally about what? You said you "go even further" to ascertain context. I pointed out that you couldn't go any further than me because we see the same text. That's when you asked "Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?" I reminded you of what you said and now here we are.

No it wasnt the entire post. He made another post and your link even shows that. See what I mean about you working with incomplete data?

If it was another post then that means it was a separate post, correct? That means I didn't post both of them but the one I did post contained the text from the entire post, right? See what I mean when I talk about critical thinking? Besides, if you read the second post then you must know that it was just more anti-white bullshit. He didn't apologize. He didn't explain it. He just dished out more of it.

Since he didnt point out any specific kid I find it hilarious.

I sincerely wish you were kidding. But alas, 'twas ever thus with you.

If you know I did why did you claim to catch me not answering the question? Obviously you didnt catch me. I pointed it out to you.

We can quibble about this for the next week but the fact is, you refused to answer a simple question and justified it by calling it an attempt at deflection. You knew full well that to answer it either way would have put you in the uncomfortable position of having to backtrack and either qualify your remarks or double down on them, thus essentially saying that no whites have ever endeavored to end racism, which you knew was bullshit and everybody else does too.

You also failed to answer my following questions. Do you not think it's important to ascertain whether a white person making derogatory remarks about blacks means a particular group of blacks or the black race in general? Do you not think that this should be the first step in enlightening those with racist views?

I strongly disagree.

You can disagree with the strength of Samson but it still doesn't mean you're right.

Whites made up racism. I always talk about them to make sure people like you dont lie and say the issue is not white people.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

You cant begin to overcome racism if you dont understand the roots of it. White people lie about racism and try to blame Black people for it when Black people are the ones most affected negatively by it. I guarantee you the reason any Black guy would spit on you is due to that Black guy being angry about white racism.

Obviously he was angry about white racism. The question is, why was he angry at me?

You guys keep telling me he was angry about white racism but the one thing you haven't done is to show that he was right and justified for doing so. If I never treated him in a condescending manner and was always respectful, was he right and justified for spitting on me?

I suspected you were an idiot at first. The final decision has not been made so you still have a chance at redemption. If the final decision had been made I wouldnt waste time answering all your statements.

I await your final judgment with bated breath...

Its amusing when white people call me arrogant. Evidently confidence in a Black guy is threatening. Confidence is not arrogance.

Saying you matter and that certain others don't is not confidence, it's egotistical arrogant bullshit.

Real confidence comes from knowing you matter as much as everyone else.

You didnt read the entire post. If you had then you wouldnt have had a problem with what he said.

I read both posts and I had a problem with both of them. You're not stupid and you read both of them too so you know as well as I do that, though the rhetoric was toned down a little in the second post, the sentiment was the same as the first. Namely, disdain for whites and white children in particular and a desire for them to "return to the suburbs".

I was speaking generally about whites. Again you seem to have some reading comprehension issues as I have mentioned this several times. I dont care what you pointed out because I agreed we read the same post. That had nothing to do with my statement about speaking generally. You made a decision after reading that post while I found more posts and quotes before making my decision.

You mean these?:

"I've just been told by FB that my rant v, white people makes me dangerous, socially media speaking, even though I'm a white people, or person, or whatever. But if the question is, what is less than white, only Herrman Melville need apply. and only Moby Dick can answer. But then they're a white whale. Let's ask Benito!"

Don't ask me what the fuck he's talking about in that one.

"FB won't let me post about the mostly hilarious email and messages I've received since Friday, roughly 30 announcing that I'm the racist, not them, three promising bodily harm. One guy even left me a phone message, which I took as a warm and personal approach to the matter. And the designations! "Racist Fuckstain" is my fave so far. Let's see if this goes through."

"Chris Knight and Jay Bandu have alerted me to last week's WNBC segment on my FB rant--two reporters asking passersby what they thought of a professor who hates white people! The interesting thing here, for my purposes, is that the "mainstream" media are just as eager as the alt-right outlets to discredit the pointy-heads in the ivory tower. It's not a vast right-wing conspiracy, in this sense, it's a conspiracy of dunces competing for the same audience."

"I meet tomorrow at noon--face-to-face, at Harlem Shake--with a guy who has threatened me with bodily harm because of my Facebook remarks on the question of racial identity. He calls himself, or rather his handle is, "Beefy Tips." Can't wait to meet him."

"If you want to see me pontificate after my wait for the no-show moron at Harlem Shake, dial into WPIX-TV on line. There you will see me impatiently explaining why reverse racism is a red herring. 98% of the hate mail I've received since 5/31 is from white supremacists. The scant remainder is from liberals who want a color-blind society. Good luck to y'all."

That last one made me laugh. Who did he think was going to send him hate mail, the Mickey Mouse Club? Of course the hate mail came from white supremacists. And here's something I'll bet he never considered: While 98% of the hate mail was from racist white supremacists, 100% of his post was racist.

Anyway, as you can see, there's no explanation or anything else from him about the post itself. All his subsequent posts were about his experiences dealing with the fallout from it. That's it.

Only a simpleton wouldnt look for more information before making a decision. This is why I say your decision making process is flawed. Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled.

Aaaand once again I have to correct you on something I've already corrected you on twice. Nobody gave me the quote. I remembered about the story, Googled it, found the article that had the full text of the post along with a screenshot of it, read the full text and then quoted the one line from it to IM2 for his edification. Got it?

Sorry. I am not kidding. No specific kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

Ah, well, in that case, black children are little negroid assholes, unlikely morons and little shitheads. No specific black kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

I'm not quibbling. I am informing you. No. Youre wrong again. I dont answer deflections primarily because I didnt give you permission to deflect. You lack the intelligence to cause me to backtrack. There is nothing you could have said on the subject that would have resulted in me backtracking.

If I disagree with something then you can rest assured that it is wrong and I am right.

I disagree. Its always white people and/or their past actions that cause racial problems.

Probably because you are white and whatever you did reminds him of racism.
Yes we have shown you. It is now out of our hands. Its not our responsibility to force you to see what you dont want to accept.

I doubt it will be important enough for me to inform you.

I think thats kind of a stupid life philosophy. If you dont set higher goals and expect more of yourself than the next person how do you keep from becoming a sheep? You should regard yourself as the best and not try to hold others back due to some insecurity complex. More white people should think like that.

No wonder you thought he was a racist even though you claim you didnt. You cant accept the mans explanation.

And again you show that you lack reading comprehension. If you look at my sentence I obviously wasnt talking about this particular quote or I would have mentioned this guy specifically. As you can see I said....

"Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled."

Note that I said "a quote" instead of "this or his quote".

No Black child was affected by your sentence even though you were angry when you said it.

 

[IM2]

Despite all this whining by GR there is no proof that guy did what he did to GR because he was white. He was describing a work situation. He did spit on GR but given what GR said, that could have been the result of the decisions GR made and not race. Then as he tells us he faced racism, he cannot show us a pattern of racist behavior by the man in question. Nor do we know how GR conducted himself in similar situations with whites on that same job. We must just accept a white mans claims of black racism when there is no history of black racism against whites and 99.9999999 percent of the time what whites here call racism has no semblance to what racism actually is.

 

[Meathead]

You got caught not answering a simple question.

Do you or do you not think it is important to know if when a white person says something negative about blacks whether he's talking about a few or the whole race? Isn't that what racial issues are all about when you get down to where the rubber meets the road: judging an entire race by their skin color or by the acts of a few? Isn't that partly why you're here?

Hah!

No lying here. I didn't say you only talk about the white race, I said you always talk about the white race.

No, it is not. White racism was not the cause behind the black guy spitting on me.
White racism was not behind the decorative cotton display at Hobby Lobby.
White racism is not behind white people wearing dreadlocks.
White racism is not behind every police officer shooting of a black person.
White racism was not behind the cops being called on the two guys at Starbucks.

Face it, people all over this country, blacks and whites both, are seeing racists and racism everywhere. It's becoming an epidemic if it hasn't already. I'm waiting for another college professor or celebrity to tell us that Lucky Charms are racist because there's a white guy on the box.

Again, why does it matter? If you don't like the question for whatever reason, you're not going to answer it, rhetorical or not.

Nothing. You had just said the same thing to me so I threw it back at you.

If my thinking that I matter was relevant to you or the discussion to a degree that you felt the need to bring it up, then why is it a non-issue in your case?

I didn't claim it off meager data, I claimed it off the entire post which I just showed you. You assumed I made a kneejerk judgment because I only quoted one line from it.

Maybe I missed something but I interpreted your remark to mean that you go further by reading for context before making a judgment. Is this not what you meant?

I'll provide the link if you want it but I didn't "claim" it was the entire post, it actually was the entire post and I told you it was.

Since you apparently now think me a liar, here's the link to the article talking about it. They even have a pic of the screenshot of the facebook post itself:

Professor accused of antiwhite racism; others say it's free speech

So you think calling children "little Caucasian assholes", "Little shithead" and "Unlikely moron" is humorous?

I didnt get caught not answering your deflection. I pointed out that I wasnt going to answer it when I replied.

I know you did. But you still refused to answer.

Thing is, you would do the exact same thing to me if you thought I was painting all blacks with a broad brush. If I had said something like "Blacks are paranoid about racism and see it everywhere", you would do one of two things: Ask me if I meant all blacks or just assume that I was.

Are you asking me to refrain from talking about the white race? Why should I stop doing that when they are the only cause of the racism I point out to my Black people?

Nope, not what I'm saying. I already told you I don't so much have a problem with you talking about the white race. The problem is (as I also already pointed out), you always talk about the white race and your attitude is that white racism is behind every race issue and incident. It is not.

When I related my story of black racism, IM2 assumed I lied and made it up because I'm white. Even after I gave him all the details that he asked for, such as did I mistreat him or chastise him in front of other crewmembers and I said no to all these questions, he had nowhere else to go so it was like "Well, uh, he's angry about white racism and besides, blacks can't be racist so nyaaah!"

The point is, white racism was not behind this guy's spitting on me. Paranoia, hate, and just plain being an asshole was behind it.

I disagree. Anything that happens racially in this country is ultimately due to white racism. You whites made up the races and the concept that the white race was the best. You own that no matter how much you want to deny it. Sorry.

Nope, I don't own it because I never said it, thought it or agreed with it.

Again I disagree. If your question is irrelevant or not allowed I wont answer. Some things are just none of your business. It matters that you ID your question as rhetorical. I dont want to think youre stupid just because you asked a rhetorical question.

Horseshit. You already thought I was an idiot long before this discussion.

It never was a non issue in my case. I typically correct people that think they matter. The only people that do matter are myself and those that are close to me or working towards the same goal as I am. Thats a serious issue.

You think you matter but you correct people who think they matter? You're either colossally arrogant or collossally stupid.

I assumed you made your misinformed decision off that post you showed me which I pointed out has no historical context and you werent there to see the body language. To make matters worse you completely forgot to evaluate this guys explanation of the whole thing which pointed out your flawed decision making process with laser like precision.

*sigh* I already explained this to you. I READ THE ENTIRE POST before I made my assessment. I just didn't quote the entire thing in my original post to IM2.

Thats exactly what I meant. If you knew thats what I meant how did you fuck it up so badly? I was speaking generally and you tried to pretend I was not.

I don't even know what you're talking about when you say you were speaking generally. Generally about what? You said you "go even further" to ascertain context. I pointed out that you couldn't go any further than me because we see the same text. That's when you asked "Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?" I reminded you of what you said and now here we are.

No it wasnt the entire post. He made another post and your link even shows that. See what I mean about you working with incomplete data?

If it was another post then that means it was a separate post, correct? That means I didn't post both of them but the one I did post contained the text from the entire post, right? See what I mean when I talk about critical thinking? Besides, if you read the second post then you must know that it was just more anti-white bullshit. He didn't apologize. He didn't explain it. He just dished out more of it.

Since he didnt point out any specific kid I find it hilarious.

I sincerely wish you were kidding. But alas, 'twas ever thus with you.

If you know I did why did you claim to catch me not answering the question? Obviously you didnt catch me. I pointed it out to you.

We can quibble about this for the next week but the fact is, you refused to answer a simple question and justified it by calling it an attempt at deflection. You knew full well that to answer it either way would have put you in the uncomfortable position of having to backtrack and either qualify your remarks or double down on them, thus essentially saying that no whites have ever endeavored to end racism, which you knew was bullshit and everybody else does too.

You also failed to answer my following questions. Do you not think it's important to ascertain whether a white person making derogatory remarks about blacks means a particular group of blacks or the black race in general? Do you not think that this should be the first step in enlightening those with racist views?

I strongly disagree.

You can disagree with the strength of Samson but it still doesn't mean you're right.

Whites made up racism. I always talk about them to make sure people like you dont lie and say the issue is not white people.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

You cant begin to overcome racism if you dont understand the roots of it. White people lie about racism and try to blame Black people for it when Black people are the ones most affected negatively by it. I guarantee you the reason any Black guy would spit on you is due to that Black guy being angry about white racism.

Obviously he was angry about white racism. The question is, why was he angry at me?

You guys keep telling me he was angry about white racism but the one thing you haven't done is to show that he was right and justified for doing so. If I never treated him in a condescending manner and was always respectful, was he right and justified for spitting on me?

I suspected you were an idiot at first. The final decision has not been made so you still have a chance at redemption. If the final decision had been made I wouldnt waste time answering all your statements.

I await your final judgment with bated breath...

Its amusing when white people call me arrogant. Evidently confidence in a Black guy is threatening. Confidence is not arrogance.

Saying you matter and that certain others don't is not confidence, it's egotistical arrogant bullshit.

Real confidence comes from knowing you matter as much as everyone else.

You didnt read the entire post. If you had then you wouldnt have had a problem with what he said.

I read both posts and I had a problem with both of them. You're not stupid and you read both of them too so you know as well as I do that, though the rhetoric was toned down a little in the second post, the sentiment was the same as the first. Namely, disdain for whites and white children in particular and a desire for them to "return to the suburbs".

I was speaking generally about whites. Again you seem to have some reading comprehension issues as I have mentioned this several times. I dont care what you pointed out because I agreed we read the same post. That had nothing to do with my statement about speaking generally. You made a decision after reading that post while I found more posts and quotes before making my decision.

You mean these?:

"I've just been told by FB that my rant v, white people makes me dangerous, socially media speaking, even though I'm a white people, or person, or whatever. But if the question is, what is less than white, only Herrman Melville need apply. and only Moby Dick can answer. But then they're a white whale. Let's ask Benito!"

Don't ask me what the fuck he's talking about in that one.

"FB won't let me post about the mostly hilarious email and messages I've received since Friday, roughly 30 announcing that I'm the racist, not them, three promising bodily harm. One guy even left me a phone message, which I took as a warm and personal approach to the matter. And the designations! "Racist Fuckstain" is my fave so far. Let's see if this goes through."

"Chris Knight and Jay Bandu have alerted me to last week's WNBC segment on my FB rant--two reporters asking passersby what they thought of a professor who hates white people! The interesting thing here, for my purposes, is that the "mainstream" media are just as eager as the alt-right outlets to discredit the pointy-heads in the ivory tower. It's not a vast right-wing conspiracy, in this sense, it's a conspiracy of dunces competing for the same audience."

"I meet tomorrow at noon--face-to-face, at Harlem Shake--with a guy who has threatened me with bodily harm because of my Facebook remarks on the question of racial identity. He calls himself, or rather his handle is, "Beefy Tips." Can't wait to meet him."

"If you want to see me pontificate after my wait for the no-show moron at Harlem Shake, dial into WPIX-TV on line. There you will see me impatiently explaining why reverse racism is a red herring. 98% of the hate mail I've received since 5/31 is from white supremacists. The scant remainder is from liberals who want a color-blind society. Good luck to y'all."

That last one made me laugh. Who did he think was going to send him hate mail, the Mickey Mouse Club? Of course the hate mail came from white supremacists. And here's something I'll bet he never considered: While 98% of the hate mail was from racist white supremacists, 100% of his post was racist.

Anyway, as you can see, there's no explanation or anything else from him about the post itself. All his subsequent posts were about his experiences dealing with the fallout from it. That's it.

Only a simpleton wouldnt look for more information before making a decision. This is why I say your decision making process is flawed. Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled.

Aaaand once again I have to correct you on something I've already corrected you on twice. Nobody gave me the quote. I remembered about the story, Googled it, found the article that had the full text of the post along with a screenshot of it, read the full text and then quoted the one line from it to IM2 for his edification. Got it?

Sorry. I am not kidding. No specific kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

Ah, well, in that case, black children are little negroid assholes, unlikely morons and little shitheads. No specific black kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

I'm not quibbling. I am informing you. No. Youre wrong again. I dont answer deflections primarily because I didnt give you permission to deflect. You lack the intelligence to cause me to backtrack. There is nothing you could have said on the subject that would have resulted in me backtracking.

If I disagree with something then you can rest assured that it is wrong and I am right.

I disagree. Its always white people and/or their past actions that cause racial problems.

Probably because you are white and whatever you did reminds him of racism.
Yes we have shown you. It is now out of our hands. Its not our responsibility to force you to see what you dont want to accept.

I doubt it will be important enough for me to inform you.

I think thats kind of a stupid life philosophy. If you dont set higher goals and expect more of yourself than the next person how do you keep from becoming a sheep? You should regard yourself as the best and not try to hold others back due to some insecurity complex. More white people should think like that.

No wonder you thought he was a racist even though you claim you didnt. You cant accept the mans explanation.

And again you show that you lack reading comprehension. If you look at my sentence I obviously wasnt talking about this particular quote or I would have mentioned this guy specifically. As you can see I said....

"Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled."

Note that I said "a quote" instead of "this or his quote".

No Black child was affected by your sentence even though you were angry when you said it.

You had no choice about the skin color your were born with, but incessant whining about will change nothing. Why don't you get a job instead. They're all over the place, even for those unskilled. It's really not that bad but you'll have to put off smoing crack and drinking Colt 45s till after work hours. Criminal convictions can be a bitch though.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Clarification for you. I knew the answer and I knew you wouldn't. I know you meant all whites and the point was to get you to see that.

Whether or not you brought it up or I did is irrelevant, you refused to answer a question.

What? I fail to see your line of reasoning here. If you didn't think you mattered then you wouldn't be here addressing what you see as a problem either. So what's your point?

I'm not here so much because you talk about the white race, I'm here because, as I said, you always talk about the white race.

You and IM2 seem to think that white racism is the answer or explanation for any and every race issue.

"A black guy spit on you? What did you do to him? Doesn't matter, he's angry about white racism."
"Oh, you didn't mistreat him? Well, uh, he's angry about white racism."
"Rwandans massacred each other? Chalk that one up to white racism."
"They raped little girls? Chalk that one up to white racism too."
"The Tutsis agreed with the laws that oppressed the Hutus and participated in their enforcement and practice just like whites did in America? White racism.
"A black guy assassinated police officers? White racism."
"A black guy assaults a cop and gets shot trying to take his gun from him? What racism."
"A black man...white racism."
"A black woman...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."
"...white racism."

ad infinitum.

What difference does that make if you were never going to answer it in the first place?

Obviously you think you matter...

"In my case, I go even further..."

Let me ask you: Did you even read the guy's post? I'm betting you did not. If you did not read the entire quote for context as I did then fuck off with your pseudo-grammarian bullshit.

Here is the professor's facebook post in its entirety:

"OK, officially, I now hate white people. I am white people, for God’s sake, but can we keep them -- us -- us out of my neighborhood? I just went to Harlem Shake on 124 and Lenox for a Classic burger to go, that would be my dinner, and the place is overrun by little Caucasian assholes (talking about white children here) who know their parents will approve of anything they do. Slide around the floor, you little shithead, sing loudly, you unlikely moron. Do what you want, nobody here is gonna restrict your right to be white. I hereby resign from my race. Fuck these people. Yeah, I know, it’s about my access to dinner. Fuck you, too.”

He faced an investigation from the university and facebook removed the post for violating their standards on hate speech. So you tell me.

Yeah just like I thought. You neglected to provide context. You were missing crucial data with which to make a informed decision. I reality you were ignorant like I suspected all along.

After a professor wrote about hating white people, Rutgers considers the limits of free speech

"Livingston told university officials that he was writing satirically, that his words weren’t a true expression of racism, and that he had a right to express his opinions, according to a copy of the investigation that he shared with the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education."

What the fuck did you think the guy was going to say when questioned about it by his employers after saying nasty shit like that about children? Of course he's going to try to justify it or play it down.

The definition of "satire" from Webster's:

1: A literary work holding up human vices and follies to ridicule and scorn.
2: Trenchant wit, irony or sarcasm used to expose and discredit vice or folly.

So which of these do you think this guy feels that being white falls under, vice or folly?

You know what's funny? I never even said the guy was racist and it wasn't the point of my post to IM2. He said to me that people like me ostracize people critical of whites and that we accuse them of "...teaching people to hate whites, accused of teaching whites to hate themselves, accused of forcing whites to feel guilty about things they did not do even as they continue doing them and all manner of things". So I gave him two examples of white people expressing disdain for the white race - the professor and Chelsea Handler - and said they were examples of "anti-white rhetoric" from whites. I never said the guy was racist.

Later on IM2 said: "This claim that teaching whites not to be racist is anti while is a weakness and it is a show of immoral character within the white race."

My response: "How does 'I now hate white people' teach whites not to be racist?"

IM2: "Probably because hating something doesnt mean you are racist."

Me: "And if he had said: 'I now hate black people.', would you still say it doesn't mean he is racist?" To which I never got an answer.

When I told you about the it, I simply used the exchange as an example of my debating technique of asking questions. That's it.

You know what's even more pathetically hilarious about all this? You would know all this if you had bothered to "go further" and read the fucking context.

I thought he was going to give an explanation for his words which he did. You obviously dont want to believe what he said because you want him to be racist.

Again, I did not say the guy was racist. Jesus, why can't you pay attention to what is said to you?

I actually don't think the guy is racist or at the very least, I simply don't know. I just think he got caught up in the anti-white tide sweeping the country. It is morally de rigueur today to be critical of whites and everybody's jumping on the bandwagon. And they're jumping on the bandwagon because the implication is that if you do not, you're racist.

I think the options you present are limiting and I will not be bound by them. I submit this definition for your consideration.

sat·ire
/ˈsaˌtī(ə)r/
noun

1. the use of humor, irony, exaggeration, or ridicule to expose and criticize people's stupidity or vices, particularly in the context of contemporary politics and other topical issues.

So this one adds the words "humor"and "exaggeration", so what? All this definition does is expand on the ways to ridicule or criticize a stupidity, vice or folly. What satire is used for in this definition is no different than Webster's.

I'm sorry but I don't buy that he called children "assholes" and "shitheads" out of satire.

You implied he was racist. We know because you tried to claim that if he said it using "Black people" instead of "white people" it would be racist.

WRONG. Once again I have to correct you on what I actually said. I asked IM2 if he would consider the guy racist if he had said black instead of white.

Again you implied the guy was racist. I posted your quote asking if the guy would be considered racist if he had said this about Black people. No one claimed the white guy was racist.

Know what? Neither did I. No one, including me, claimed the guy was racist. Has this not occurred to you?

Evidently you considered him to be racist or you would never have made the comparison. Here is your question. Its pretty obvious you were trying to justify thinking he was a racist because of what he said about whites and trying to get IM2 to agree with you.


"And if he had said: "I now hate black people.", would you still say it doesn't mean he is racist?"

What do you mean so what? If it was done in humor then it wasnt racist. Thats so what. This dude is a white dude. He can joke about his own race without it being racist.

He said himself it was satire. He never used the word "joke". In regards to the word "humor" as it applies to satire, humor is simply the vehicle. The destination or purpose of satire is ridicule.

See above. I have already exposed you believed the white guy was racist. If you didnt then you would have never asked if it was racist if he had said "Black guy" instead of "white guy".

Something that has not occurred to you but, again, you would know if you had gone further and read for context: IM2 is the one who brought up the word "racist", not me. Like I said, I used it as an example of anti-white rhetoric. His response was something like "Just because you hate something doesn't mean you're racist."

I never said the guy was racist. IM2, like you, missed my point.

Evidently you considered him to be racist or you would never have made the comparison. Here is your question. Its pretty obvious you were trying to justify thinking he was a racist because of what he said about whites and trying to get IM2 to agree with you.

"And if he had said: "I now hate black people.", would you still say it doesn't mean he is racist?"

A question is not a comparison. You need to go further and read for context. Besides, I just told you in my last post I didn't think the guy was racist for Christ's sake. I also told you that I posted it to IM2 as an example of anti-white rhetoric from whites, not that the guy was racist. No one but you and IM2 have brought up the word "racism" in connection with this guy. That is, other than my question to him and that was only after he brought it up.

Since you read the posts and presumably the article, do you even know what sparked the whole thing? He was pissed off because the unruly kids were keeping him from getting to the takeout counter to get his order. He even admitted as much in the post: "Yeah, I know, it’s about my access to dinner. Fuck you, too.”

You always give me shit about reading comprehension and lectured me about context but you apparently are unable to see from the plain black and white text that the guy got pissed and had a temper tantrum. There was no joking or satire there. He just had a conniption fit and for whatever reason, instead of just getting frustrated with the kids, he chose the entire white race as the target of his ire because he couldn't get his fucking food.

See above. I have already exposed you believed the white guy was racist. If you didnt then you would have never asked if it was racist if he had said "Black guy" instead of "white guy".

Let me ask you something, what purpose would I have for not openly calling this guy racist? Why do you think it's something I'm trying to hide?

BTW, you keep rolling your eyes like that they're gonna get stuck that way. Then again, maybe they did already and is why you can't understand plain English.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

If your argument is that the inferior race was whites and they had to legistlate an advantage, doesn't that make them superior ( as they were smart enough to come up with a strategy ensuring their survival?) I mean human beings are much weaker physically than many species on the planet but our intelligence ensures our survival, so we discovered fire, weapons etc to our benefit, making us the dominant species. Your argument is racist and illogical.

No that doesnt make them superior. That makes them decidedly inferior. If whites were superior they would have needed zero legislation or any kind of advantage to out succeed other races. Its like tying a handicapped kids show laces to the other shoe so you win a race. You dont hold back inferior competition. You just beat them.

So on your thinking since human beings need weapons to protect them against stronger animals, they are inferior? Superiority is an ability to secure your survival by whatever means. That is how the rich get richer and the poort get poorer. Or are you saying life is a kids' game and no one should cheat?

Correct. There is a reason we need guns and other weapons. We are inferior to a bear. You ever see what happens when a bear and a unarmed human meet? Nope. Securing your survival by any means is adaptation not superiority. Exactly. People that cheat are weak and need a crutch.

A crutch like, say, white people are the weaker race?

No that wouldnt be a crutch. That would be an explanation of the reason white people concentrated their energy on creating a system of racism. They couldnt compete and knew this instinctively so they had to cheat.

So whites that were exploring the world, inventing things like steam power, the telegraph, cement, electromagnet, the typewriter, internal combustion engine and building grand structures were intimidated by a people still living relatively primitively. Hokay.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

You got caught not answering a simple question.

Do you or do you not think it is important to know if when a white person says something negative about blacks whether he's talking about a few or the whole race? Isn't that what racial issues are all about when you get down to where the rubber meets the road: judging an entire race by their skin color or by the acts of a few? Isn't that partly why you're here?

Hah!

No lying here. I didn't say you only talk about the white race, I said you always talk about the white race.

No, it is not. White racism was not the cause behind the black guy spitting on me.
White racism was not behind the decorative cotton display at Hobby Lobby.
White racism is not behind white people wearing dreadlocks.
White racism is not behind every police officer shooting of a black person.
White racism was not behind the cops being called on the two guys at Starbucks.

Face it, people all over this country, blacks and whites both, are seeing racists and racism everywhere. It's becoming an epidemic if it hasn't already. I'm waiting for another college professor or celebrity to tell us that Lucky Charms are racist because there's a white guy on the box.

Again, why does it matter? If you don't like the question for whatever reason, you're not going to answer it, rhetorical or not.

Nothing. You had just said the same thing to me so I threw it back at you.

If my thinking that I matter was relevant to you or the discussion to a degree that you felt the need to bring it up, then why is it a non-issue in your case?

I didn't claim it off meager data, I claimed it off the entire post which I just showed you. You assumed I made a kneejerk judgment because I only quoted one line from it.

Maybe I missed something but I interpreted your remark to mean that you go further by reading for context before making a judgment. Is this not what you meant?

I'll provide the link if you want it but I didn't "claim" it was the entire post, it actually was the entire post and I told you it was.

Since you apparently now think me a liar, here's the link to the article talking about it. They even have a pic of the screenshot of the facebook post itself:

Professor accused of antiwhite racism; others say it's free speech

So you think calling children "little Caucasian assholes", "Little shithead" and "Unlikely moron" is humorous?

I didnt get caught not answering your deflection. I pointed out that I wasnt going to answer it when I replied.

I know you did. But you still refused to answer.

Thing is, you would do the exact same thing to me if you thought I was painting all blacks with a broad brush. If I had said something like "Blacks are paranoid about racism and see it everywhere", you would do one of two things: Ask me if I meant all blacks or just assume that I was.

Are you asking me to refrain from talking about the white race? Why should I stop doing that when they are the only cause of the racism I point out to my Black people?

Nope, not what I'm saying. I already told you I don't so much have a problem with you talking about the white race. The problem is (as I also already pointed out), you always talk about the white race and your attitude is that white racism is behind every race issue and incident. It is not.

When I related my story of black racism, IM2 assumed I lied and made it up because I'm white. Even after I gave him all the details that he asked for, such as did I mistreat him or chastise him in front of other crewmembers and I said no to all these questions, he had nowhere else to go so it was like "Well, uh, he's angry about white racism and besides, blacks can't be racist so nyaaah!"

The point is, white racism was not behind this guy's spitting on me. Paranoia, hate, and just plain being an asshole was behind it.

I disagree. Anything that happens racially in this country is ultimately due to white racism. You whites made up the races and the concept that the white race was the best. You own that no matter how much you want to deny it. Sorry.

Nope, I don't own it because I never said it, thought it or agreed with it.

Again I disagree. If your question is irrelevant or not allowed I wont answer. Some things are just none of your business. It matters that you ID your question as rhetorical. I dont want to think youre stupid just because you asked a rhetorical question.

Horseshit. You already thought I was an idiot long before this discussion.

It never was a non issue in my case. I typically correct people that think they matter. The only people that do matter are myself and those that are close to me or working towards the same goal as I am. Thats a serious issue.

You think you matter but you correct people who think they matter? You're either colossally arrogant or collossally stupid.

I assumed you made your misinformed decision off that post you showed me which I pointed out has no historical context and you werent there to see the body language. To make matters worse you completely forgot to evaluate this guys explanation of the whole thing which pointed out your flawed decision making process with laser like precision.

*sigh* I already explained this to you. I READ THE ENTIRE POST before I made my assessment. I just didn't quote the entire thing in my original post to IM2.

Thats exactly what I meant. If you knew thats what I meant how did you fuck it up so badly? I was speaking generally and you tried to pretend I was not.

I don't even know what you're talking about when you say you were speaking generally. Generally about what? You said you "go even further" to ascertain context. I pointed out that you couldn't go any further than me because we see the same text. That's when you asked "Who said I could go any further than you in understanding the context?" I reminded you of what you said and now here we are.

No it wasnt the entire post. He made another post and your link even shows that. See what I mean about you working with incomplete data?

If it was another post then that means it was a separate post, correct? That means I didn't post both of them but the one I did post contained the text from the entire post, right? See what I mean when I talk about critical thinking? Besides, if you read the second post then you must know that it was just more anti-white bullshit. He didn't apologize. He didn't explain it. He just dished out more of it.

Since he didnt point out any specific kid I find it hilarious.

I sincerely wish you were kidding. But alas, 'twas ever thus with you.

If you know I did why did you claim to catch me not answering the question? Obviously you didnt catch me. I pointed it out to you.

We can quibble about this for the next week but the fact is, you refused to answer a simple question and justified it by calling it an attempt at deflection. You knew full well that to answer it either way would have put you in the uncomfortable position of having to backtrack and either qualify your remarks or double down on them, thus essentially saying that no whites have ever endeavored to end racism, which you knew was bullshit and everybody else does too.

You also failed to answer my following questions. Do you not think it's important to ascertain whether a white person making derogatory remarks about blacks means a particular group of blacks or the black race in general? Do you not think that this should be the first step in enlightening those with racist views?

I strongly disagree.

You can disagree with the strength of Samson but it still doesn't mean you're right.

Whites made up racism. I always talk about them to make sure people like you dont lie and say the issue is not white people.

Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn't.

You cant begin to overcome racism if you dont understand the roots of it. White people lie about racism and try to blame Black people for it when Black people are the ones most affected negatively by it. I guarantee you the reason any Black guy would spit on you is due to that Black guy being angry about white racism.

Obviously he was angry about white racism. The question is, why was he angry at me?

You guys keep telling me he was angry about white racism but the one thing you haven't done is to show that he was right and justified for doing so. If I never treated him in a condescending manner and was always respectful, was he right and justified for spitting on me?

I suspected you were an idiot at first. The final decision has not been made so you still have a chance at redemption. If the final decision had been made I wouldnt waste time answering all your statements.

I await your final judgment with bated breath...

Its amusing when white people call me arrogant. Evidently confidence in a Black guy is threatening. Confidence is not arrogance.

Saying you matter and that certain others don't is not confidence, it's egotistical arrogant bullshit.

Real confidence comes from knowing you matter as much as everyone else.

You didnt read the entire post. If you had then you wouldnt have had a problem with what he said.

I read both posts and I had a problem with both of them. You're not stupid and you read both of them too so you know as well as I do that, though the rhetoric was toned down a little in the second post, the sentiment was the same as the first. Namely, disdain for whites and white children in particular and a desire for them to "return to the suburbs".

I was speaking generally about whites. Again you seem to have some reading comprehension issues as I have mentioned this several times. I dont care what you pointed out because I agreed we read the same post. That had nothing to do with my statement about speaking generally. You made a decision after reading that post while I found more posts and quotes before making my decision.

You mean these?:

"I've just been told by FB that my rant v, white people makes me dangerous, socially media speaking, even though I'm a white people, or person, or whatever. But if the question is, what is less than white, only Herrman Melville need apply. and only Moby Dick can answer. But then they're a white whale. Let's ask Benito!"

Don't ask me what the fuck he's talking about in that one.

"FB won't let me post about the mostly hilarious email and messages I've received since Friday, roughly 30 announcing that I'm the racist, not them, three promising bodily harm. One guy even left me a phone message, which I took as a warm and personal approach to the matter. And the designations! "Racist Fuckstain" is my fave so far. Let's see if this goes through."

"Chris Knight and Jay Bandu have alerted me to last week's WNBC segment on my FB rant--two reporters asking passersby what they thought of a professor who hates white people! The interesting thing here, for my purposes, is that the "mainstream" media are just as eager as the alt-right outlets to discredit the pointy-heads in the ivory tower. It's not a vast right-wing conspiracy, in this sense, it's a conspiracy of dunces competing for the same audience."

"I meet tomorrow at noon--face-to-face, at Harlem Shake--with a guy who has threatened me with bodily harm because of my Facebook remarks on the question of racial identity. He calls himself, or rather his handle is, "Beefy Tips." Can't wait to meet him."

"If you want to see me pontificate after my wait for the no-show moron at Harlem Shake, dial into WPIX-TV on line. There you will see me impatiently explaining why reverse racism is a red herring. 98% of the hate mail I've received since 5/31 is from white supremacists. The scant remainder is from liberals who want a color-blind society. Good luck to y'all."

That last one made me laugh. Who did he think was going to send him hate mail, the Mickey Mouse Club? Of course the hate mail came from white supremacists. And here's something I'll bet he never considered: While 98% of the hate mail was from racist white supremacists, 100% of his post was racist.

Anyway, as you can see, there's no explanation or anything else from him about the post itself. All his subsequent posts were about his experiences dealing with the fallout from it. That's it.

Only a simpleton wouldnt look for more information before making a decision. This is why I say your decision making process is flawed. Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled.

Aaaand once again I have to correct you on something I've already corrected you on twice. Nobody gave me the quote. I remembered about the story, Googled it, found the article that had the full text of the post along with a screenshot of it, read the full text and then quoted the one line from it to IM2 for his edification. Got it?

Sorry. I am not kidding. No specific kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

Ah, well, in that case, black children are little negroid assholes, unlikely morons and little shitheads. No specific black kid was pointed out so no harm no foul.

I'm not quibbling. I am informing you. No. Youre wrong again. I dont answer deflections primarily because I didnt give you permission to deflect. You lack the intelligence to cause me to backtrack. There is nothing you could have said on the subject that would have resulted in me backtracking.

"Permission to deflect". I love it. If nothing else you're good for a chuckle now and then.

Anyway, my intelligence or lack thereof is irrelevant. I wasn't trying to get you to backtrack because I knew damn well you wouldn't answer it or address it in any way. You did exactly as I expected you to do: avoid the question.
I've posed questions to IM2 many times and almost without fail, I knew which ones he was not going to answer every time and I was right. Not answering says much more than an actual answer.

And I don't know why you keep saying it was a deflection anyway. The question was pertinent to the topic at hand and the distinction between some whites or all whites not endeavoring to stop racism is important and germane.

If I disagree with something then you can rest assured that it is wrong and I am right.

Uh huh. With that remark, I now know that if you disagree with something then I can rest assured that you're full of shit.

I disagree. Its always white people and/or their past actions that cause racial problems.

Yeah, sure.

Probably because you are white and whatever you did reminds him of racism.

You didn't answer the question. Do you or do you not think he was right or justified in spitting on me if I treated him respectfully?

I think thats kind of a stupid life philosophy. If you dont set higher goals and expect more of yourself than the next person how do you keep from becoming a sheep? You should regard yourself as the best and not try to hold others back due to some insecurity complex. More white people should think like that.

There's your problem right there. If you think setting higher goals and expecting more of yourself is what makes you matter then you don't know what it means to matter. You matter by simple virtue of being a human being. We all do.

No wonder you thought he was a racist even though you claim you didnt. You cant accept the mans explanation.

I accepted his explanation for what he said it was: satire. In other words, ridicule of white children.

And again you show that you lack reading comprehension. If you look at my sentence I obviously wasnt talking about this particular quote or I would have mentioned this guy specifically. As you can see I said....

"Somebody gives you a quote out of context and you are easily fooled."

Note that I said "a quote" instead of "this or his quote".

Don't be an idiot. But, just for shits and giggles, I'll play along. So if you weren't referring to this particular case and this particular quote, who and when did somebody give me a quote out of context and I was easily fooled?

No Black child was affected by your sentence even though you were angry when you said it.

I wasn't angry, that was satire.