What exactly do republicans have to offer blacks?

[IM2]

Pointing out your racism isnt whining. Its an alert system. Stop trying to get my attention. I know you suffer from insecurity but get some help for it.

While you two look to blame others for your failures, all I can do is wish you both the best.

The only people looking to blame others for their failures are you white racists. There are threads here full of examples that prove it. Both A and I have done better than you. If you had to go through what we did to get where we are today, your ass would have quit as a teenager, folded up and spent the rest of your life in a fetal position sucking your thumb.

Why do you hate white people so much that you spend the twilight years of your life arguing with strangers on forum boards? Why so much hate, IM2? Why are you such a racist? Crazy stuff.

Post a racist comment I have said.

Let's see, whites my age and older are here every day saying racist crap and all you see is me rebutting them and you call that hate. You're a stupid fuck junior.

You insinuate that white people can only be successful because of "handouts". Though no one knows what these handouts are exactly, that only white people get. I've certainly never seen them.

That's like saying blacks can only be successful through quotas and affirmative action. I think most people would agree that the implications of that line of thought are pretty prejudiced. One might even call them racist.

Besides I do call out white racists on here all the damn time, so don't gimme that bull. You only see what you want to see.

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

Thank you for showing me why blacks are so damn successful in African nations and the Carribean and such failures in the USA and other white, English speaking nations. I never realized how oppressed you are here!

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum

None of this is true. But you are just too stupid to understand that blacks and whites do not share the same lived experience. And that what you call racism in blacks is a response the racism we get from whites. Id think ta being black I can say that as an expert. And you can't..

Look at what you're doing here. You're still excusing or justifying racist or inappropriate behavior by blacks by citing more racism by whites. It's a victimhood contest for you and always has been.

If a black person experiences racism by whites then anger and frustration are justifiable reactions. Spitting on a white person who may or may not be guilty of racism or harassment is not a justifiable reaction. After all this time, you still don't understand this?

When whites spit on blacks it was done after a bunch of racial slurs.

What if it was not done after a bunch of racial slurs? What if it was something else or even nothing at all? Again you try to constrain or define the parameters of the white position by unilaterally citing a "bunch of racial slurs", as if this is the only reason a black person might spit on a white person. It never even occurred to you that the black guy who spit on me just may have been wrong about my intentions. And even when I pointed this out, you dismissed it or ignored it.

Your story doesn't contain that. And that is why I was asking for evidence.

My story also didn't contain any indication that I was lying or even that I did in fact harass him because he was black. But that didn't stop you from accusing me of both. And this was before you even knew me and before you asked for any details.

Your first impulse should have been to ask me for details before passing judgment. Instead, your first impulse - your reaction to white racism - was to assume I lied or that I did harass him. The questions didn't come until after the accusations. And even after I answered all your questions and there was still no indication that I harassed him and every indication he was wrong, you still didn't believe it and moved on to the next thing which was documented evidence that he was guilty of past racism. This was after you accused me of racism and lying or harassment without documented evidence of racism on my part.

From the very beginning, as the story unfolded and the details were sussed out, you looked for something, anything, to make me wrong or the bad guy. First it was me lying. When you realized the story may have been true, it became me being the racist and harassing him. After getting some details, it became him being angry about white racism. After getting more details, you wanted documented evidence. When I pointed out that I didn't have any documented incidents of racism, you simply backed off and said no more about it.

Your story has a complication in the form of a workplace incident involving the black worker. So he could have been angry about that.

Unless you're saying he was justified in spitting on me regardless of my actual intentions then this is irrelevant. Whatever problems he had with white people were not my problems and I am not obligated to take that into consideration where the job is concerned. I had a job to do and so did he. I am not going to spend my life tiptoeing around blacks for fear of inadvertently pissing them off.

Rider, we are about the same age. I have worked jobs like the one you described and have been the only black on a job or worked with one other black. In this situation whites such as you tend to push the racist envelope.

What do you mean "Whites such as you"? You have no fucking clue as to whether or not I ever pushed the "racist envelope" in my job or was inappropriate in any way with my black coworkers.

I worked at a moving company and heard kunta kente and other racist jokes daily. Much less other racist comments. But of course you worked at the most racially tolerant place in American history and the only racists were the 2 blacks who worked there.

And right there is a part of your problem. Your sarcasm and exaggerations above are in no way a reflection of what I told you or conveyed to you. In addition, the last sentence is incorrect in two parts, which shows once again that you don't even bother to remember what I said.

1. ) All I said was that our company had always hired blacks and I've worked with blacks all through my entire 34 years with the company. So there were many more than two blacks working there. I also said that blacks have been in this industry ever since I got into this line of work.
2.) I already told you that the other black guy never said anything about it and I never said he was racist.

Do you see now why I won't let this go? You don't even have the integrity to remember what I tell you about it. Every one of your arguments and comments on this in the last six months are based on the two erroneous assumptions you made at the very start: I lied or I harassed him.
I've given you the complete story and nothing I told you indicates I lied or harassed him but you keep going back to that anyway because it's the only way you can make me wrong.

So what I'm saying is, can the bullshit. Because that's what it is. Your whining lacks moral reasoning and is truly the definition of what imbecilic and moronic is.

You and Asclepias trade snarky comments about my intellect and you can't even stick to one definition of racism.

 

[IM2]

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

Thank you for showing me why blacks are so damn successful in African nations and the Carribean and such failures in the USA and other white, English speaking nations. I never realized how oppressed you are here!

Yawn.

 

[John Shaw]

While you two look to blame others for your failures, all I can do is wish you both the best.

The only people looking to blame others for their failures are you white racists. There are threads here full of examples that prove it. Both A and I have done better than you. If you had to go through what we did to get where we are today, your ass would have quit as a teenager, folded up and spent the rest of your life in a fetal position sucking your thumb.

Why do you hate white people so much that you spend the twilight years of your life arguing with strangers on forum boards? Why so much hate, IM2? Why are you such a racist? Crazy stuff.

Post a racist comment I have said.

Let's see, whites my age and older are here every day saying racist crap and all you see is me rebutting them and you call that hate. You're a stupid fuck junior.

You insinuate that white people can only be successful because of "handouts". Though no one knows what these handouts are exactly, that only white people get. I've certainly never seen them.

That's like saying blacks can only be successful through quotas and affirmative action. I think most people would agree that the implications of that line of thought are pretty prejudiced. One might even call them racist.

Besides I do call out white racists on here all the damn time, so don't gimme that bull. You only see what you want to see.

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

So basically you're talking the past, and about rich white people. I know you ain't talking about white working class people, because they're not doing much better than black working class people these days. My parents raised us in a fucking trailer park, working hard labor to make ends meet until my dad could finish his education. Now he's solidly middle class. I don't see what's preventing black people from doing something similar, except that maybe they end up in shit schools more often. But whose fault is that? People refuse to take a closer look at what's happening in poverty-stricken communities or do anything about it.

Let me share a little secret with you; rich white people give no more of a fuck about poor and middle class whites than they care about poor and middle class blacks. They only care about themselves. and their families. There is no racist conspiracy.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I haven't read this thread in a while, any luck with the group claims? What was the haul? Anything?

 

[Carl in Michigan]

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

Thank you for showing me why blacks are so damn successful in African nations and the Carribean and such failures in the USA and other white, English speaking nations. I never realized how oppressed you are here!

Yawn.

Yeah, It's time for blacks to wake up. You're destined to be "victims" until the end of time.

 

[IM2]

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum

None of this is true. But you are just too stupid to understand that blacks and whites do not share the same lived experience. And that what you call racism in blacks is a response the racism we get from whites. Id think ta being black I can say that as an expert. And you can't..

Look at what you're doing here. You're still excusing or justifying racist or inappropriate behavior by blacks by citing more racism by whites. It's a victimhood contest for you and always has been.

If a black person experiences racism by whites then anger and frustration are justifiable reactions. Spitting on a white person who may or may not be guilty of racism or harassment is not a justifiable reaction. After all this time, you still don't understand this?

When whites spit on blacks it was done after a bunch of racial slurs.

What if it was not done after a bunch of racial slurs? What if it was something else or even nothing at all? Again you try to constrain or define the parameters of the white position by unilaterally citing a "bunch of racial slurs", as if this is the only reason a black person might spit on a white person. It never even occurred to you that the black guy who spit on me just may have been wrong about my intentions. And even when I pointed this out, you dismissed it or ignored it.

Your story doesn't contain that. And that is why I was asking for evidence.

My story also didn't contain any indication that I was lying or even that I did in fact harass him because he was black. But that didn't stop you from accusing me of both. And this was before you even knew me and before you asked for any details.

Your first impulse should have been to ask me for details before passing judgment. Instead, your first impulse - your reaction to white racism - was to assume I lied or that I did harass him. The questions didn't come until after the accusations. And even after I answered all your questions and there was still no indication that I harassed him and every indication he was wrong, you still didn't believe it and moved on to the next thing which was documented evidence that he was guilty of past racism. This was after you accused me of racism and lying or harassment without documented evidence of racism on my part.

From the very beginning, as the story unfolded and the details were sussed out, you looked for something, anything, to make me wrong or the bad guy. First it was me lying. When you realized the story may have been true, it became me being the racist and harassing him. After getting some details, it became him being angry about white racism. After getting more details, you wanted documented evidence. When I pointed out that I didn't have any documented incidents of racism, you simply backed off and said no more about it.

Your story has a complication in the form of a workplace incident involving the black worker. So he could have been angry about that.

Unless you're saying he was justified in spitting on me regardless of my actual intentions then this is irrelevant. Whatever problems he had with white people were not my problems and I am not obligated to take that into consideration where the job is concerned. I had a job to do and so did he. I am not going to spend my life tiptoeing around blacks for fear of inadvertently pissing them off.

Rider, we are about the same age. I have worked jobs like the one you described and have been the only black on a job or worked with one other black. In this situation whites such as you tend to push the racist envelope.

What do you mean "Whites such as you"? You have no fucking clue as to whether or not I ever pushed the "racist envelope" in my job or was inappropriate in any way with my black coworkers.

I worked at a moving company and heard kunta kente and other racist jokes daily. Much less other racist comments. But of course you worked at the most racially tolerant place in American history and the only racists were the 2 blacks who worked there.

And right there is a part of your problem. Your sarcasm and exaggerations above are in no way a reflection of what I told you or conveyed to you. In addition, the last sentence is incorrect in two parts, which shows once again that you don't even bother to remember what I said.

1. ) All I said was that our company had always hired blacks and I've worked with blacks all through my entire 34 years with the company. So there were many more than two blacks working there. I also said that blacks have been in this industry ever since I got into this line of work.
2.) I already told you that the other black guy never said anything about it and I never said he was racist.

Do you see now why I won't let this go? You don't even have the integrity to remember what I tell you about it. Every one of your arguments and comments on this in the last six months are based on the two erroneous assumptions you made at the very start: I lied or I harassed him.
I've given you the complete story and nothing I told you indicates I lied or harassed him but you keep going back to that anyway because it's the only way you can make me wrong.

So what I'm saying is, can the bullshit. Because that's what it is. Your whining lacks moral reasoning and is truly the definition of what imbecilic and moronic is.

You and Asclepias trade snarky comments about my intellect and you can't even stick to one definition of racism.

The facts and documentation on the American record shows that your argument is silly and without merit. That's just how it is. Whites continue to be racists and there is nothing blacks have done that even close.. But as you are not obligated to stop racism in e white communiy we are under no obligation to listen to you talk about your perception of racism or your clams of black racism. So I'm done doing it.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

And whites have been practicing racist behavior consistently for over 400 years but that black man could not have spit on you because you said simethig racist or whites treated him like shit on that job.. The more you post the more I see that man had to endure a whole lot of white racism on that job. Because young white men join gangs and kill each other. On top of that, they provide the drugs to everyone else.

All of this is irrelevant to the idea of black men having too much morality and character to spit on someone but have no qualms about murdering other black men.

You always try to turn it into a contest but you're simply too short sighted to see that it's way more complicated than that.

I think you have hit on something with the "contest" For example, if whites have lynched 100 blacks due to racism, IM2 seems to believe that blacks get to lynch 100 whites +1 before the blacks can be racist.

Except Ghost rider is the one making this a contest. His blacks are racist too argument is exactly that.

This is not a contest for me and never was. I saw a lot of anger at whites when I came here and a lot of rhetoric suggesting that only whites can be racist. I did not agree with this view so I related my story as an example. That's when you started all this nonsense about power and authority and systems and the whole "blacks can't be racist because they don't have the power.." bullshit (after you first called me a liar without cause or evidence of course). Ever since then, no matter what I say, it's "400 years..." and "Blacks never made laws and policies..." "Blacks don't have control of...".

It has always been a contest of victimhood with you and is the very foundation of your entire view about whites and racism.

Wrong. Black Victimhood is a lie made up by a white college drop out. What I saw when I came here was over1,000 threads of white racist hatred of blacks.

Once again you fail to understand where I'm coming from. Are there black victims of white racism? Of course. I never suggested otherwise. Are there more of them? Of course. I never suggested otherwise. My point is that you always cite the fact of more white racism when anyone cites an incident of black racism, as if the greater numbers somehow absolve the black racist of his/her racist act.

NOTHING

you have experienced is even remotely close to racism.

YES I have. See, I can use bold type and larger font too. It doesn't mean shit.

"That's when you started all this nonsense about power and authority and systems and the whole "blacks can't be racist because they don't have the power.." bullshit (after you first called me a liar without cause or evidence of course). Ever since then, no matter what I say, it's "400 years..." and "Blacks never made laws and policies..." "Blacks don't have control of...".

None of this is nonsense and if you had ever faced racism you would understand that. I am right. You are not. And that's the bottom line.

Sorry, but to say that system-wide power and authority are necessary for practicing racism is nonsense and defies logic.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I know enough to know that the two of you disagree on this one point. I've been debating with the both of you for months and in that time I've learned that you think blacks can be racist - which you just said in this thread - and that IM2 thinks blacks can't be racist at all.

So young black men will join gangs and murder other black men for control of drug territory but spitting on people is morally beneath them?

You just said in this thread that blacks can be racist but it never occurred to you that he might have spit on me for that reason?

And whites have been practicing racist behavior consistently for over 400 years but that black man could not have spit on you because you said simethig racist or whites treated him like shit on that job.. The more you post the more I see that man had to endure a whole lot of white racism on that job. Because young white men join gangs and kill each other. On top of that, they provide the drugs to everyone else.

All of this is irrelevant to the idea of black men having too much morality and character to spit on someone but have no qualms about murdering other black men.

You always try to turn it into a contest but you're simply too short sighted to see that it's way more complicated than that.

It is relevant, very much so. It is also tp say that you have no right to say he shit you did we whites di ad have dine far worse things. I know how complicated things are, you are the one who doesn't. That is why you hang on to this notion of black racism without considering the complexity of how 4 centuries of continuing white racism plays into the manner in which we react to whites..

I can tell when you get piqued because the misspellings increase.

Anyway, this may or may not explain the reason some blacks react to white racism the way they do but that in no way means that the reaction is right, moral or fair.

It does explain it. Period. Whites like you are pathetic. The reaction is just. What causes the reaction is the problem.

It is not just if the black person is wrong about the white person's intentions and his reaction is to spit on him as in my case. The WAY or the form that the reaction takes is not always right, moral or fair.

Tell me, was Alton Sterling's reaction of assassinating three police officers in Baton Rouge (one of whom was black btw) right, moral or fair when, for all he knew, these officers were not racist or had never shot a black man?

 

[John Shaw]

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum

None of this is true. But you are just too stupid to understand that blacks and whites do not share the same lived experience. And that what you call racism in blacks is a response the racism we get from whites. Id think ta being black I can say that as an expert. And you can't..

Look at what you're doing here. You're still excusing or justifying racist or inappropriate behavior by blacks by citing more racism by whites. It's a victimhood contest for you and always has been.

If a black person experiences racism by whites then anger and frustration are justifiable reactions. Spitting on a white person who may or may not be guilty of racism or harassment is not a justifiable reaction. After all this time, you still don't understand this?

When whites spit on blacks it was done after a bunch of racial slurs.

What if it was not done after a bunch of racial slurs? What if it was something else or even nothing at all? Again you try to constrain or define the parameters of the white position by unilaterally citing a "bunch of racial slurs", as if this is the only reason a black person might spit on a white person. It never even occurred to you that the black guy who spit on me just may have been wrong about my intentions. And even when I pointed this out, you dismissed it or ignored it.

Your story doesn't contain that. And that is why I was asking for evidence.

My story also didn't contain any indication that I was lying or even that I did in fact harass him because he was black. But that didn't stop you from accusing me of both. And this was before you even knew me and before you asked for any details.

Your first impulse should have been to ask me for details before passing judgment. Instead, your first impulse - your reaction to white racism - was to assume I lied or that I did harass him. The questions didn't come until after the accusations. And even after I answered all your questions and there was still no indication that I harassed him and every indication he was wrong, you still didn't believe it and moved on to the next thing which was documented evidence that he was guilty of past racism. This was after you accused me of racism and lying or harassment without documented evidence of racism on my part.

From the very beginning, as the story unfolded and the details were sussed out, you looked for something, anything, to make me wrong or the bad guy. First it was me lying. When you realized the story may have been true, it became me being the racist and harassing him. After getting some details, it became him being angry about white racism. After getting more details, you wanted documented evidence. When I pointed out that I didn't have any documented incidents of racism, you simply backed off and said no more about it.

Your story has a complication in the form of a workplace incident involving the black worker. So he could have been angry about that.

Unless you're saying he was justified in spitting on me regardless of my actual intentions then this is irrelevant. Whatever problems he had with white people were not my problems and I am not obligated to take that into consideration where the job is concerned. I had a job to do and so did he. I am not going to spend my life tiptoeing around blacks for fear of inadvertently pissing them off.

Rider, we are about the same age. I have worked jobs like the one you described and have been the only black on a job or worked with one other black. In this situation whites such as you tend to push the racist envelope.

What do you mean "Whites such as you"? You have no fucking clue as to whether or not I ever pushed the "racist envelope" in my job or was inappropriate in any way with my black coworkers.

I worked at a moving company and heard kunta kente and other racist jokes daily. Much less other racist comments. But of course you worked at the most racially tolerant place in American history and the only racists were the 2 blacks who worked there.

And right there is a part of your problem. Your sarcasm and exaggerations above are in no way a reflection of what I told you or conveyed to you. In addition, the last sentence is incorrect in two parts, which shows once again that you don't even bother to remember what I said.

1. ) All I said was that our company had always hired blacks and I've worked with blacks all through my entire 34 years with the company. So there were many more than two blacks working there. I also said that blacks have been in this industry ever since I got into this line of work.
2.) I already told you that the other black guy never said anything about it and I never said he was racist.

Do you see now why I won't let this go? You don't even have the integrity to remember what I tell you about it. Every one of your arguments and comments on this in the last six months are based on the two erroneous assumptions you made at the very start: I lied or I harassed him.
I've given you the complete story and nothing I told you indicates I lied or harassed him but you keep going back to that anyway because it's the only way you can make me wrong.

So what I'm saying is, can the bullshit. Because that's what it is. Your whining lacks moral reasoning and is truly the definition of what imbecilic and moronic is.

You and Asclepias trade snarky comments about my intellect and you can't even stick to one definition of racism.

The facts and documentation on the American record shows that your argument is silly and without merit. That's just how it is. Whites continue to be racists and there is nothing blacks have done that even close.. But as you are not obligated to stop racism in e white communiy we are under no obligation to listen to you talk about your perception of racism or your clams of black racism. So I'm done doing it.

So wait, why are you here?

You say you don't care about other peoples' opinions ... you're not going to listen to anyone (not even disagree, but just disregard them completely) ... does that mean you're just here to try to ... what, spread propaganda? Circle jerk with the black supremacists? What's the point? I don't get it.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Nope. That's not my point. The point is that the two of you disagree on a fundamental aspect of racial issues: the ability or possibility of blacks being racist. Now, if I were any less jaded than I am about how some blacks approach racial issues, I would wonder why this point never came up between you. But, being as jaded as I am from debating the two of you, I know exactly why it never came up.

You want to make a claim in order to build straw men based on false equivalences. But like I said, for you to even try making blacks racist, you have to deny whites have a continuing 400 year practice of racist behavior and that what blacks are doing is a reaction to that behavior.

How do you know if we have never discussed this point before?

I don't. I'm just making an assumption which is what you guys do to me all the time.

Who told you we disagree?

If by "disagree" you mean having discussed it, no one. But if by "disagree" you have a difference of opinion, well, you do.

If we do disagree what made you think its something fundamental?

You don't think that the question as to whether or not blacks can be racist is fundamental? Seriously?

It is a fundamental distinction because if the black person cannot be racist then the white person is always at fault or always the racist in every situation. If, however, the black person can, in fact, be racist, it changes the rules and parameters of the entire game. This then allows for the possibility that the black person citing racism just might be wrong. It also allows for the possibility that a black person can practice racism by denying a white person a job or show favoritism to black students or employees or whatever. But this is a possibility that people like IM2 just can't entertain.

Thats good. As long as you understand its just an assumption i will allow it.

So neither of us have told you that we disagree. Why do you think we disagree then?

Because one says blacks can be racist and the other doesn't. Haven't you been paying attention? You believe the exact opposite of each other on the issue of blacks being racist and whatever word you choose to describe it and whether or not you discussed it, you and he have opposing views on this.

Correct. Blacks being racist or not has zilch to do with white racism.

Blacks being racist has everything to do with it. It means that blacks can do the exact same shit whites did. Given enough time - say 50 to 100 years - if the anti-white sentiment in this country takes hold and there is a large shift in the majority race in political offices, theoretically whites could start losing liberties.
Apparently there are already black folks out there that think whites are the weaker race. How many of these people are there? How many other blacks will they win over to this way of thinking? How long before whites are seen as a threat or a competition and laws and policies are passed?

In my particular case, if blacks cannot be racist, then this means the guy that spit on me is a chickenshit with no honor (which does nothing to help your argument that whites are the weaker race).
If blacks can be racist then this opens the possibility that, if he was wrong that I was being racist or that I was harassing him, then he spit on me because I'm white which makes him a racist chickenshit with no honor.

My posts on racism have absolutely nothing to do with a Black person being racist. Its always about how whites are racists due to various insecurities that have caused them to legislate themselves a head start because they cant compete without assistance. This system is called racism.

This is where you go off the rails in your reasoning. Whites would have done just fine even with black competition. They didn't legislate themselves a head start because they couldn't compete without assistance, they just thought the black man was inferior. The same way you think whites are inferior.

I disagree. Youre white so you have no clue what it is he is saying. I agree with IM2.

If my being white precludes me from understanding what you guys say then why the fuck are you talking to me? Do you have anything beyond the pat phrases that explain nothing? Anytime you don't have a logical argument or response you give me the "You're white, you wouldn't understand" bullshit.

If he's speaking plain English then I understand him just fine. He has been telling me ever since I got here that blacks cannot be racist. Why do you think he continues to deny the validity of my story in spite of the fact that everything I told him suggests the guy was wrong and overreacted?

Nope. Whites were racists long before they begin to bring Africans to the US. Sorry but your own historians have documented this. Blacks being racist has nothing to do with whites implementing their system of racism.

What? This has nothing to do with what I said.

My case doesnt need any help. Its a fact whites implemented a system to not only benefit themselves but to deprive other races from attaining success. Thats weak sauce everyday of the week and twice on Sunday. Then you throw in the fact that our tremendous Blackness was able to still achieve and whites in a fit of jealous rage would attack and burn these affluent Black communities to the ground. Again this is your white fear and weakness prompting these attacks. I know it fucks with your heads. I know its embarrassing for you but thats what happens when you are fundamentally flawed and weak as a race. You have to hold back the very people you claimed were inferior to you.

What? Again, this has nothing to do with what I said.

History tells us otherwise. Whites have never done fine without help and I mean massive help. You were still living in caves and eating each other in savage fashion when you were educated by Blacks in Egypt. Whites were so weak and dumb you couldnt even invent your own alphabet and came up with probably the dumbest counting system known to mankind. After you fucked up and lost the knowledge the Egyptians gave you your race fell apart again and damn near regressed back to a neanderthal like existence during the Dark Ages. This time Islamic Blacks came over and showed you that bathing was actually a good thing and that water didnt contain evil spirits. They taught you fashion, music, science, erected castles, showed you how build toilets etc. When you criminal whites were sent to N. America Blacks had to help you yet again. You were too weak to work in the fields and too dumb to grow the crops you wanted so you stole Black people from Africa to show you how and provide the muscle. Even the greatest accomplishment you whites love to tout wouldnt have occurred if a group of Black women hadnt charted the way to the moon for you. So you weakness is exposed at every turn. You know it. I know it. Worst of all you know I know you know it.

Blah blah blah Just black racist rantings.

 

[IM2]

The only people looking to blame others for their failures are you white racists. There are threads here full of examples that prove it. Both A and I have done better than you. If you had to go through what we did to get where we are today, your ass would have quit as a teenager, folded up and spent the rest of your life in a fetal position sucking your thumb.

Why do you hate white people so much that you spend the twilight years of your life arguing with strangers on forum boards? Why so much hate, IM2? Why are you such a racist? Crazy stuff.

Post a racist comment I have said.

Let's see, whites my age and older are here every day saying racist crap and all you see is me rebutting them and you call that hate. You're a stupid fuck junior.

You insinuate that white people can only be successful because of "handouts". Though no one knows what these handouts are exactly, that only white people get. I've certainly never seen them.

That's like saying blacks can only be successful through quotas and affirmative action. I think most people would agree that the implications of that line of thought are pretty prejudiced. One might even call them racist.

Besides I do call out white racists on here all the damn time, so don't gimme that bull. You only see what you want to see.

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

So basically you're talking the past, and about rich white people. I know you ain't talking about white working class people, because they're not doing much better than black working class people these days. My parents raised us in a fucking trailer park, working hard labor to make ends meet until my dad could finish his education. Now he's solidly middle class. I don't see what's preventing black people from doing something similar, except that maybe they end up in shit schools more often. But whose fault is that? People refuse to take a closer look at what's happening in poverty-stricken communities or do anything about it.

Let me share a little secret with you; rich white people give no more of a fuck about poor and middle class whites than they care about poor and middle class blacks. They only care about themselves. and their families. There is no racist conspiracy.

I've lived 57 years. When you were born I was the age you are right now. I think I know plenty about whites..

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

There are a lot of things you don't know young boy. You talk about rich whites and what they don't care about. But rich whites run for office at every level while poor and working class whites vote for them. Trump is a rich white man who ran on racial resentment and poor/working class whites in droves voted him into office. The median income for whites is far higher than it is for blacks and the black working class earns far less than the white working class. When you study the issue of race and income or as an economic matter you find this to be true. I 've sat in city halls and watched local policy enacted that stopped blacks from doing what your parents did. It's easy to post opinion but the facts are important in this debate.

 

[John Shaw]

Why do you hate white people so much that you spend the twilight years of your life arguing with strangers on forum boards? Why so much hate, IM2? Why are you such a racist? Crazy stuff.

Post a racist comment I have said.

Let's see, whites my age and older are here every day saying racist crap and all you see is me rebutting them and you call that hate. You're a stupid fuck junior.

You insinuate that white people can only be successful because of "handouts". Though no one knows what these handouts are exactly, that only white people get. I've certainly never seen them.

That's like saying blacks can only be successful through quotas and affirmative action. I think most people would agree that the implications of that line of thought are pretty prejudiced. One might even call them racist.

Besides I do call out white racists on here all the damn time, so don't gimme that bull. You only see what you want to see.

Let me show you a few then. AA has benefitted whites the most. Because what I have said,most people would call FACT. People like this white guy.

Early Racial Preferences

We all know the old history, but it's still worth reminding ourselves of its scale and scope. Affirmative action in the American "workplace" first began in the late 17th century when European indentured servants - the original source of unfree labor on the new tobacco plantations of Virginia and Maryland - were replaced by African slaves. In exchange for their support and their policing of the growing slave population, lower-class Europeans won new rights, entitlements, and opportunities from the planter elite.

White Americans were also given a head start with the help of the U.S. Army. The 1830 Indian Removal Act, for example, forcibly relocated Cherokee, Creeks and other eastern Indians to west of the Mississippi River to make room for white settlers. The 1862 Homestead Act followed suit, giving away millions of acres of what had been Indian Territory west of the Mississippi. Ultimately, 270 million acres, or 10% of the total land area of the United States, was converted to private hands, overwhelmingly white, under Homestead Act provisions.

The 1790 Naturalization Act permitted only "free white persons" to become naturalized citizens, thus opening the doors to European immigrants but not others. Only citizens could vote, serve on juries, hold office, and in some cases, even hold property. In this century, Alien Land Laws passed in California and other states, reserved farm land for white growers by preventing Asian immigrants, ineligible to become citizens, from owning or leasing land. Immigration restrictions further limited opportunities for nonwhite groups. Racial barriers to naturalized U.S. citizenship weren't removed until the McCarran-Walter Act in 1952, and white racial preferences in immigration remained until 1965.

more.

The Advantages Grow, Generation to Generation

Less known are more recent government racial preferences, first enacted during the New Deal, that directed wealth to white families and continue to shape life opportunities and chances.

The landmark Social Security Act of 1935 provided a safety net for millions of workers, guaranteeing them an income after retirement. But the act specifically excluded two occupations: agricultural workers and domestic servants, who were predominately African American, Mexican, and Asian. As low-income workers, they also had the least opportunity to save for their retirement.

Like Social Security, the 1935 Wagner Act helped establish an important new right for white people. By granting unions the power of collective bargaining, it helped millions of white workers gain entry into the middle class over the next 30 years. But the Wagner Act permitted unions to exclude non-whites and deny them access to better paid jobs and union protections and benefits such as health care, job security, and pensions. Many craft unions remained nearly all-white well into the 1970s.

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

RACE - The Power of an Illusion | White Advantage

So basically you're talking the past, and about rich white people. I know you ain't talking about white working class people, because they're not doing much better than black working class people these days. My parents raised us in a fucking trailer park, working hard labor to make ends meet until my dad could finish his education. Now he's solidly middle class. I don't see what's preventing black people from doing something similar, except that maybe they end up in shit schools more often. But whose fault is that? People refuse to take a closer look at what's happening in poverty-stricken communities or do anything about it.

Let me share a little secret with you; rich white people give no more of a fuck about poor and middle class whites than they care about poor and middle class blacks. They only care about themselves. and their families. There is no racist conspiracy.

I've lived 57 years. When you were born I was the age you are right now. I think I know plenty about whites..

But it was another racialized New Deal program, the Federal Housing Administration, that helped generate much of the wealth that so many white families enjoy today. These revolutionary programs made it possible for millions of average white Americans - but not others - to own a home for the first time. The government set up a national neighborhood appraisal system, explicitly tying mortgage eligibility to race. Integrated communities were ipso facto deemed a financial risk and made ineligible for home loans, a policy known today as "redlining." Between 1934 and 1962, the federal government backed $120 billion of home loans. More than 98% went to whites.

There are a lot of things you don't know young boy. You talk about rich whites and what they don't care about. But rich whites run for office at every level while poor and working class whites vote for them. Trump is a rich white man who ran on racial resentment and poor/working class whites in droves voted him into office. The median income for whites is far higher than it is for blacks and the black working class earns far less than the white working class. When you study the issue of race and income or as an economic matter you find this to be true. I 've sat in city halls and watched local policy enacted that stopped blacks from doing what your parents did. It's easy to post opinion but the facts are important in this debate.

So are you just here to complain then? You are complaining about inherited wealth from unfair government programs of the past that no longer exist. Okay, but the path to the middle class is still there. My family was poor as shit when I was young. I lived on ramen, macaroni, and other cheap crap because that's all we could afford. Yet we made it out with no government assistance. So while blacks may have a tougher road due to mistakes of the past, that road is there. I haven't heard a single viable suggestion that comes across as fair. Social welfare will keep a man from drowning but won't teach him how to swim. Education is the key It always has been.

In fact, even though I have an MA, I'm going back to school at some point to pick up an MBA. Who knows? Maybe I'll get a third Masters or a JD. And my parents would've been considered white trailer trash back in the day.

 

[IM2]

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum

None of this is true. But you are just too stupid to understand that blacks and whites do not share the same lived experience. And that what you call racism in blacks is a response the racism we get from whites. Id think ta being black I can say that as an expert. And you can't..

Look at what you're doing here. You're still excusing or justifying racist or inappropriate behavior by blacks by citing more racism by whites. It's a victimhood contest for you and always has been.

If a black person experiences racism by whites then anger and frustration are justifiable reactions. Spitting on a white person who may or may not be guilty of racism or harassment is not a justifiable reaction. After all this time, you still don't understand this?

When whites spit on blacks it was done after a bunch of racial slurs.

What if it was not done after a bunch of racial slurs? What if it was something else or even nothing at all? Again you try to constrain or define the parameters of the white position by unilaterally citing a "bunch of racial slurs", as if this is the only reason a black person might spit on a white person. It never even occurred to you that the black guy who spit on me just may have been wrong about my intentions. And even when I pointed this out, you dismissed it or ignored it.

Your story doesn't contain that. And that is why I was asking for evidence.

My story also didn't contain any indication that I was lying or even that I did in fact harass him because he was black. But that didn't stop you from accusing me of both. And this was before you even knew me and before you asked for any details.

Your first impulse should have been to ask me for details before passing judgment. Instead, your first impulse - your reaction to white racism - was to assume I lied or that I did harass him. The questions didn't come until after the accusations. And even after I answered all your questions and there was still no indication that I harassed him and every indication he was wrong, you still didn't believe it and moved on to the next thing which was documented evidence that he was guilty of past racism. This was after you accused me of racism and lying or harassment without documented evidence of racism on my part.

From the very beginning, as the story unfolded and the details were sussed out, you looked for something, anything, to make me wrong or the bad guy. First it was me lying. When you realized the story may have been true, it became me being the racist and harassing him. After getting some details, it became him being angry about white racism. After getting more details, you wanted documented evidence. When I pointed out that I didn't have any documented incidents of racism, you simply backed off and said no more about it.

Your story has a complication in the form of a workplace incident involving the black worker. So he could have been angry about that.

Unless you're saying he was justified in spitting on me regardless of my actual intentions then this is irrelevant. Whatever problems he had with white people were not my problems and I am not obligated to take that into consideration where the job is concerned. I had a job to do and so did he. I am not going to spend my life tiptoeing around blacks for fear of inadvertently pissing them off.

Rider, we are about the same age. I have worked jobs like the one you described and have been the only black on a job or worked with one other black. In this situation whites such as you tend to push the racist envelope.

What do you mean "Whites such as you"? You have no fucking clue as to whether or not I ever pushed the "racist envelope" in my job or was inappropriate in any way with my black coworkers.

I worked at a moving company and heard kunta kente and other racist jokes daily. Much less other racist comments. But of course you worked at the most racially tolerant place in American history and the only racists were the 2 blacks who worked there.

And right there is a part of your problem. Your sarcasm and exaggerations above are in no way a reflection of what I told you or conveyed to you. In addition, the last sentence is incorrect in two parts, which shows once again that you don't even bother to remember what I said.

1. ) All I said was that our company had always hired blacks and I've worked with blacks all through my entire 34 years with the company. So there were many more than two blacks working there. I also said that blacks have been in this industry ever since I got into this line of work.
2.) I already told you that the other black guy never said anything about it and I never said he was racist.

Do you see now why I won't let this go? You don't even have the integrity to remember what I tell you about it. Every one of your arguments and comments on this in the last six months are based on the two erroneous assumptions you made at the very start: I lied or I harassed him.
I've given you the complete story and nothing I told you indicates I lied or harassed him but you keep going back to that anyway because it's the only way you can make me wrong.

So what I'm saying is, can the bullshit. Because that's what it is. Your whining lacks moral reasoning and is truly the definition of what imbecilic and moronic is.

You and Asclepias trade snarky comments about my intellect and you can't even stick to one definition of racism.

The facts and documentation on the American record shows that your argument is silly and without merit. That's just how it is. Whites continue to be racists and there is nothing blacks have done that even close.. But as you are not obligated to stop racism in e white communiy we are under no obligation to listen to you talk about your perception of racism or your clams of black racism. So I'm done doing it.

So wait, why are you here?

You say you don't care about other peoples' opinions ... you're not going to listen to anyone (not even disagree, but just disregard them completely) ... does that mean you're just here to try to ... what, spread propaganda? Circle jerk with the black supremacists? What's the point? I don't get it.

There are no black supremacists here and I don't spread propagada. The only one here wanting to circle jerk with supremacists is you.

 

[John Shaw]

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum

None of this is true. But you are just too stupid to understand that blacks and whites do not share the same lived experience. And that what you call racism in blacks is a response the racism we get from whites. Id think ta being black I can say that as an expert. And you can't..

Look at what you're doing here. You're still excusing or justifying racist or inappropriate behavior by blacks by citing more racism by whites. It's a victimhood contest for you and always has been.

If a black person experiences racism by whites then anger and frustration are justifiable reactions. Spitting on a white person who may or may not be guilty of racism or harassment is not a justifiable reaction. After all this time, you still don't understand this?

When whites spit on blacks it was done after a bunch of racial slurs.

What if it was not done after a bunch of racial slurs? What if it was something else or even nothing at all? Again you try to constrain or define the parameters of the white position by unilaterally citing a "bunch of racial slurs", as if this is the only reason a black person might spit on a white person. It never even occurred to you that the black guy who spit on me just may have been wrong about my intentions. And even when I pointed this out, you dismissed it or ignored it.

Your story doesn't contain that. And that is why I was asking for evidence.

My story also didn't contain any indication that I was lying or even that I did in fact harass him because he was black. But that didn't stop you from accusing me of both. And this was before you even knew me and before you asked for any details.

Your first impulse should have been to ask me for details before passing judgment. Instead, your first impulse - your reaction to white racism - was to assume I lied or that I did harass him. The questions didn't come until after the accusations. And even after I answered all your questions and there was still no indication that I harassed him and every indication he was wrong, you still didn't believe it and moved on to the next thing which was documented evidence that he was guilty of past racism. This was after you accused me of racism and lying or harassment without documented evidence of racism on my part.

From the very beginning, as the story unfolded and the details were sussed out, you looked for something, anything, to make me wrong or the bad guy. First it was me lying. When you realized the story may have been true, it became me being the racist and harassing him. After getting some details, it became him being angry about white racism. After getting more details, you wanted documented evidence. When I pointed out that I didn't have any documented incidents of racism, you simply backed off and said no more about it.

Your story has a complication in the form of a workplace incident involving the black worker. So he could have been angry about that.

Unless you're saying he was justified in spitting on me regardless of my actual intentions then this is irrelevant. Whatever problems he had with white people were not my problems and I am not obligated to take that into consideration where the job is concerned. I had a job to do and so did he. I am not going to spend my life tiptoeing around blacks for fear of inadvertently pissing them off.

Rider, we are about the same age. I have worked jobs like the one you described and have been the only black on a job or worked with one other black. In this situation whites such as you tend to push the racist envelope.

What do you mean "Whites such as you"? You have no fucking clue as to whether or not I ever pushed the "racist envelope" in my job or was inappropriate in any way with my black coworkers.

I worked at a moving company and heard kunta kente and other racist jokes daily. Much less other racist comments. But of course you worked at the most racially tolerant place in American history and the only racists were the 2 blacks who worked there.

And right there is a part of your problem. Your sarcasm and exaggerations above are in no way a reflection of what I told you or conveyed to you. In addition, the last sentence is incorrect in two parts, which shows once again that you don't even bother to remember what I said.

1. ) All I said was that our company had always hired blacks and I've worked with blacks all through my entire 34 years with the company. So there were many more than two blacks working there. I also said that blacks have been in this industry ever since I got into this line of work.
2.) I already told you that the other black guy never said anything about it and I never said he was racist.

Do you see now why I won't let this go? You don't even have the integrity to remember what I tell you about it. Every one of your arguments and comments on this in the last six months are based on the two erroneous assumptions you made at the very start: I lied or I harassed him.
I've given you the complete story and nothing I told you indicates I lied or harassed him but you keep going back to that anyway because it's the only way you can make me wrong.

So what I'm saying is, can the bullshit. Because that's what it is. Your whining lacks moral reasoning and is truly the definition of what imbecilic and moronic is.

You and Asclepias trade snarky comments about my intellect and you can't even stick to one definition of racism.

The facts and documentation on the American record shows that your argument is silly and without merit. That's just how it is. Whites continue to be racists and there is nothing blacks have done that even close.. But as you are not obligated to stop racism in e white communiy we are under no obligation to listen to you talk about your perception of racism or your clams of black racism. So I'm done doing it.

So wait, why are you here?

You say you don't care about other peoples' opinions ... you're not going to listen to anyone (not even disagree, but just disregard them completely) ... does that mean you're just here to try to ... what, spread propaganda? Circle jerk with the black supremacists? What's the point? I don't get it.

There are no black supremacists here and I don't spread propagada. The only one here wanting to circle jerk with supremacists is you.

No, except for Asceplias (however you spell the idiot's name), who has referred to himself as a black supremacist, or Paul Essien, who thinks white women deserve to be raped and advocates for genocide. Other than those, there are probably only a few others.

I'm still not sure whether you qualify. It's clear that you judge people primarily based on their skin color, but that doesn't necessarily make you a racist. Just prejudiced.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

All of this is irrelevant to the idea of black men having too much morality and character to spit on someone but have no qualms about murdering other black men.

You always try to turn it into a contest but you're simply too short sighted to see that it's way more complicated than that.

I think you have hit on something with the "contest" For example, if whites have lynched 100 blacks due to racism, IM2 seems to believe that blacks get to lynch 100 whites +1 before the blacks can be racist.

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time.

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum.

No its nothing like that. How you came up with that is bizarre.

If racism is in fact as the dictionaries define it then it is exactly like that. Racism and racist acts are not defined in any way, shape or form as you and IM2 so quaintly believe. Racism is an assessment of another person based on their skin color. A racist act is defined as an act towards a person of that race because of their skin color. That's it. If I spit on a black man because he's black, that's a racist act that stems from racism.

That's it. There is nothing else to the basic essence and meaning of these two terms beyond that. To say otherwise is moral relativism.

Racism is in fact a system based on race.

No, it is not. At least not always.

In order to implement racism you have to have a consensus of the group implementing it. In order for that group to implement racism that group needs to have power. Nothing a white person says could ever change that fact. It is what it is.

You have appropriated the words "racist" and "racism" and given them your own meanings and definitions for your own purposes. It's neat, tidy, easy, all-encompassing and fills in all those pesky gaps. It means you don't have to do the work of actually examining a race issue from different perspectives. That might mean whitey might be occasionally right or innocent of racism and we can't have that now, can we? This was the only way you could make whitey wrong every time.

It's lazy, stupid, short sighted and intellectually dishonest.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Your argument is based on hypotheticals. "But if a black guys does this" is not the same as " when a white guy did this." We are taking abut a proven record of white racist behavior, you are arguing a bunch of what ifs.

White fragility.

I'm beginning to think that the reality whites subscribe to forces them to try and equate things that simply are not the same. They have trouble with simple concepts like history and facts.

Racism = racism. What's not the same here?

Racism ≠ reaction to racism. Your equation is incorrect. Thats what is not the same.

If one's reaction to racism is to be racist (such as calling whites the weaker race or spitting on a white guy) then yes, it is the same.

Nope its not the same. Its called understanding that the best defense is a potent and tremendous offense. I for one will not sit back and just block your racism. I am going to go on the offensive by spitting on you or telling you about how weak you are to place obstacles in the path of the people you claim are inferior. If you had your shit together you wouldnt have a problem with me. The problem you have with me is one of your own creation and endeavors to keep it going. The difference is so apparent that its laughable you think they are the same.

Um, okay.

I can tell when you guys get rattled. IM2 misspells more words and the profanity goes up a notch. Your style when you get flustered or have no cogent response is to spout stupid shit like this that you think will piss me off. The more you get backed into the corner, the more outrageous and inciteful your remarks.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

i

All of this is irrelevant to the idea of black men having too much morality and character to spit on someone but have no qualms about murdering other black men.

You always try to turn it into a contest but you're simply too short sighted to see that it's way more complicated than that.

I think you have hit on something with the "contest" For example, if whites have lynched 100 blacks due to racism, IM2 seems to believe that blacks get to lynch 100 whites +1 before the blacks can be racist.

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time.

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum.

No its nothing like that. How you came up with that is bizarre.

If racism is in fact as the dictionaries define it then it is exactly like that. Racism and racist acts are not defined in any way, shape or form as you and IM2 so quaintly believe. Racism is an assessment of another person based on their skin color. A racist act is defined as an act towards a person of that race because of their skin color. That's it. If I spit on a black man because he's black, that's a racist act that stems from racism.

That's it. There is nothing else to the basic essence and meaning of these two terms beyond that. To say otherwise is moral relativism.

If you took what you claim was racism to the courts, you'd lose because you'd have no proof the act was caused because of your race. You could spit on a black man because he robbed you. This is why there must be proof. Racism is the belief you are superior to another person on the basis of race.

You'd have no proof I was lying either.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

What IM2 invariably does in these discussions is to, when all else fails, point out that whites practiced racism more often and for a longer period of time. In his contorted view, a black guy who spits on a white guy (this happened to me years ago) because the guy is white is not racism, but it is racism when a white person spits on a black person because more whites have spit on blacks for a longer period of time

This is like saying that if I kill three people over the course of three days, it's not morally wrong because another guy killed a hundred people over a hundred days. There's no moral reasoning to this argument whatsoever. It's nothing more than morality by numbers. It is the most moronic thing I've ever encountered on a discussion forum

None of this is true. But you are just too stupid to understand that blacks and whites do not share the same lived experience. And that what you call racism in blacks is a response the racism we get from whites. Id think ta being black I can say that as an expert. And you can't..

Look at what you're doing here. You're still excusing or justifying racist or inappropriate behavior by blacks by citing more racism by whites. It's a victimhood contest for you and always has been.

If a black person experiences racism by whites then anger and frustration are justifiable reactions. Spitting on a white person who may or may not be guilty of racism or harassment is not a justifiable reaction. After all this time, you still don't understand this?

When whites spit on blacks it was done after a bunch of racial slurs.

What if it was not done after a bunch of racial slurs? What if it was something else or even nothing at all? Again you try to constrain or define the parameters of the white position by unilaterally citing a "bunch of racial slurs", as if this is the only reason a black person might spit on a white person. It never even occurred to you that the black guy who spit on me just may have been wrong about my intentions. And even when I pointed this out, you dismissed it or ignored it.

Your story doesn't contain that. And that is why I was asking for evidence.

My story also didn't contain any indication that I was lying or even that I did in fact harass him because he was black. But that didn't stop you from accusing me of both. And this was before you even knew me and before you asked for any details.

Your first impulse should have been to ask me for details before passing judgment. Instead, your first impulse - your reaction to white racism - was to assume I lied or that I did harass him. The questions didn't come until after the accusations. And even after I answered all your questions and there was still no indication that I harassed him and every indication he was wrong, you still didn't believe it and moved on to the next thing which was documented evidence that he was guilty of past racism. This was after you accused me of racism and lying or harassment without documented evidence of racism on my part.

From the very beginning, as the story unfolded and the details were sussed out, you looked for something, anything, to make me wrong or the bad guy. First it was me lying. When you realized the story may have been true, it became me being the racist and harassing him. After getting some details, it became him being angry about white racism. After getting more details, you wanted documented evidence. When I pointed out that I didn't have any documented incidents of racism, you simply backed off and said no more about it.

Your story has a complication in the form of a workplace incident involving the black worker. So he could have been angry about that.

Unless you're saying he was justified in spitting on me regardless of my actual intentions then this is irrelevant. Whatever problems he had with white people were not my problems and I am not obligated to take that into consideration where the job is concerned. I had a job to do and so did he. I am not going to spend my life tiptoeing around blacks for fear of inadvertently pissing them off.

Rider, we are about the same age. I have worked jobs like the one you described and have been the only black on a job or worked with one other black. In this situation whites such as you tend to push the racist envelope.

What do you mean "Whites such as you"? You have no fucking clue as to whether or not I ever pushed the "racist envelope" in my job or was inappropriate in any way with my black coworkers.

I worked at a moving company and heard kunta kente and other racist jokes daily. Much less other racist comments. But of course you worked at the most racially tolerant place in American history and the only racists were the 2 blacks who worked there.

And right there is a part of your problem. Your sarcasm and exaggerations above are in no way a reflection of what I told you or conveyed to you. In addition, the last sentence is incorrect in two parts, which shows once again that you don't even bother to remember what I said.

1. ) All I said was that our company had always hired blacks and I've worked with blacks all through my entire 34 years with the company. So there were many more than two blacks working there. I also said that blacks have been in this industry ever since I got into this line of work.
2.) I already told you that the other black guy never said anything about it and I never said he was racist.

Do you see now why I won't let this go? You don't even have the integrity to remember what I tell you about it. Every one of your arguments and comments on this in the last six months are based on the two erroneous assumptions you made at the very start: I lied or I harassed him.
I've given you the complete story and nothing I told you indicates I lied or harassed him but you keep going back to that anyway because it's the only way you can make me wrong.

So what I'm saying is, can the bullshit. Because that's what it is. Your whining lacks moral reasoning and is truly the definition of what imbecilic and moronic is.

You and Asclepias trade snarky comments about my intellect and you can't even stick to one definition of racism.

The facts and documentation on the American record shows that your argument is silly and without merit. That's just how it is. Whites continue to be racists and there is nothing blacks have done that even close..

Just more victimhood contest rhetoric.

[/quote]But as you are not obligated to stop racism in e white communiy we are under no obligation to listen to you talk about your perception of racism or your clams of black racism. So I'm done doing it.[/QUOTE]

You've said that before. The truth is, you can't resist the temptation of making whitey wrong. That's why you keep coming back.