Integration, Multiculturalism, Diversity - Why they always fail

Because everyone is racist. There are evolutionary advantages to racism. People are hard-wired to trust and help people who are related to them - they are the ones we likely share genes with. If someone looks different, then they are likely unrelated to us and we instnictively and sub-consciously dislike them.


Speak for yourself racist. There are plenty of people from all races and creeds who don't use 'race' as their social barometer. I'm mixed race and I know that there are good and bad people of all races, colors, and creeds. I'm willing to bet that the last person who fucked your 'significant other', lied to you, beat your ass, and ripped you off was the same 'race' as you.

ADAM CLARK ESTES 10,113 ViewsJUN 7, 2011
In the wake of this year's many disasters, the flow of bad news coming out Haiti has slowed to a trickle. Last week actually brought some good news that the 2010 quake's death toll might actually be much lower than reported. And then WikiLeaks swoops in with with 1,918 documents from a seven-year period starting 10 months before the coup that ousted President Jean-Bertrand Aristide on February 29, 2004 and ending six weeks after the January 12, 2010 earthquake. In partnership with WikiLeaks, The Nation and the Haitian weekly newspaper Haïti Liberté are publishing a series of stories that so far*highlight how America has been micromanaging and manhandling the Haitian government into aligning their policies with U.S. interests. It is, of course, not news that the United States bullies allies into doing what she wants, but the first couple of scoops are worth itemizing.

America Used Haiti as a Pawn in an Oil War Against Venezuela

René Préval took power after Aristide's ousting and immediately visited the United States to bolster confidence in the two nations' diplomatic relations. According to*a March 26, 2006 cable written by*U.S. Ambassador Janet Sanderson,*Préval wanted "to bury once and for all the suspicion in Haiti that the United States is wary of him," wary because of Préval's ties to Cuba and Venezuela. Sanderson also said that Préval "stressed to the Embassy that he will manage relations with Cuba and Venezuela solely for the benefit of the Haitian people, and not based on any ideological affinity toward those governments."*But American behavior behind the scenes would show how "wary" may have been too gentle a word.

Préval quickly dashed his own hopes for a strong relationship with his northern allies by negotiating a deal with the Venezuelan-based oil alliance PetroCaribe. Recognizing how the deal made sense both for Haiti's strapped budget and poverty-stricken people--the Haitian government "would save USD 100 million per year from the delayed payments" by American embassy estimates--the*United States stonewalled the deal for years to come. American officials apparently helped to enlist Chevron and ExxonMobil, the only U.S. oil companies operating in Haiti, to block their shipments and refuse to transport PetroCaribe oil, a necessary requirement for Haiti to sign the deal. Despite the American ambassador's recognizing Haiti's lack of interest in anti-American politics--"At no time has Preval given any indication that he is interested in associating Haiti with Chavez’s broader ‘revolutionary agenda,'" she wrote in one cable--Sanderson suggested that the U.S. "convey our discontent with Preval's actions at the highest possible level when he next visits Washington" after*Préval*visited Venezuela to negotiate a related energy deal that would bring electricity to more homes and save the Haitian people millions.

Chevron ultimately signed the PetroCaribe deal in early 2008, despite U.S. protests, but only after two years of negotiations potentially watered down the benefit to Haiti. However, as The Nation points out, "The extraordinary story that the Haiti WikiLeaks cables tell of the US Embassy’s campaign against PetroCaribe--which provides such obvious benefits for Haiti--lays bare the real priorities of 'Haiti's most important and reliable bi-lateral partner,' as Sanderson calls the United States."

America Wanted to Keep Haiti's Minimum Wage at 24¢ an Hour

Préval's campaign to raise the nation's minimum wage caught the attention of the Obama administration. The bump 37¢ bump seems small by American standards, but considering it would raise wages by 150 percent--from 24¢ and hour to 61¢ an hour--the new rule stood to dramatically affect the lives of poor Haitians. However, it would also dramatically affect the bottom line of American companies,*like Hanes and Levi Strauss who contracted labor in Haiti to sew their clothes. The companies insisted on capping the wage increase at 7¢ an hour, and the U.S. ambassador pressured Préval into a $3 per day wage for textile workers, $2 less than the original $5 a day that Préval had wanted. The Nation's report* on the negotiations show continued disapproval with the politics of the whole thing:

Still the US Embassy wasn’t pleased. A deputy chief of mission, David E. Lindwall, said the $5 per day minimum “did not take economic reality into account” but was a populist measure aimed at appealing to “the unemployed and underpaid masses.”
Ryan Chittum at the Columbia Journalism Review did a little bit of math to put these figures into perspective. The proposed $5 per day falls well short of The Nation's estimated $12.50 per day needed for a Haitian family of three to make ends meet. But how dramatically will the even lower $3 a day affect the American companies with a stake in the matter?

Zooming in on specific companies helps clarify this even more. As of last year Hanes had 3,200 Haitians making t-shirts for it. Paying each of them two bucks a day more would cost it about $1.6 million a year. Hanesbrands Incorporated made*$211 million*on $4.3 billion in sales last year, and presumably it would pass on at least some of its higher labor costs to consumers.
Chittum notes that Hanes's CEO Richard Noll could cover the losses with just one sixth of his $10 million compensation package. That makes American Apparel and their no sweatshop policy look angelic, sex-crazed CEO Dov Charney and all.

*The Nation pulled their report on the minimum wage dispute after publishing it briefly in accordance with a publishing schedule agreement with*Haïti Liberté.*CJR*snatched a summary while it was briefly online and*The Nation*will publish its full report tomorrow.*

Want to add to this story? Let us know in comments. You can share ideas for stories on the Open Wire.
Adam Clark Estes

Sources
WikiLeaks Haiti: The PetroCaribe Files, Dan Coughlin and Kim Ives, The NationWikiLeaks Haiti: Let Them Live on $3/Day, The NationA Pulled Scoop Shows U.S. Fought to Keep Haitian Wages Down, Ryan Chittum, Columbia Journalism Review
Topics: Haiti, WikiLeaks, State Department, Renee Preval


:clap2::clap2::clap2::clap2:
 
Because everyone is racist. There are evolutionary advantages to racism. People are hard-wired to trust and help people who are related to them - they are the ones we likely share genes with. If someone looks different, then they are likely unrelated to us and we instnictively and sub-consciously dislike them.

Bullshit.
 
Integration didn't work. It failed.

Yeah, that's why we have a 'bi-racial' President and the mixing of racial cultures here in the United States. Too bad you don't like it. :lol:

We got the mixing - but it's not working. Almost all negros and hispos are criminals and/or welfare bums. Only whites are productive.

On the average, Asians are far more "productive" than caucasoids. And if one measures productivity based on labor cost per man hour, in most cases most Hispanics would be as well. Why else do you think that the "brilliant" whites who operate corporations in this country have outsourced so many jobs?
 
[
On the average, Asians are far more "productive" than caucasoids. And if one measures productivity based on labor cost per man hour, in most cases most Hispanics would be as well. Why else do you think that the "brilliant" whites who operate corporations in this country have outsourced so many jobs?

America has almost the highest corporate tax rate in the world. That's why we have outsourcing. THINK
 
[
On the average, Asians are far more "productive" than caucasoids. And if one measures productivity based on labor cost per man hour, in most cases most Hispanics would be as well. Why else do you think that the "brilliant" whites who operate corporations in this country have outsourced so many jobs?

America has almost the highest corporate tax rate in the world. That's why we have outsourcing. THINK

Yeah, because our working standards are exactly the same as Chinese Sweatshops. Sure, outsourcing only exists because of Corporate taxing.
 
Integration didn't work. It failed.

Yeah, that's why we have a 'bi-racial' President and the mixing of racial cultures here in the United States. Too bad you don't like it. :lol:

We got the mixing - but it's not working. Almost all negros and hispos are criminals and/or welfare bums. Only whites are productive.

LOL, you must be making a parody of an ignorant racist with your post! Thanks for the laugh though!!!
 
" America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''

-Ronald Reagan, August 10, 1988

LOL, if that's true, why did they keep the overwhelming majority of Blacks as slaves instead of allowing them to be Freemen? Why did they have the Black codes, Jim Crow, segregation, discrimination, and The Mulford Act.

What the fuck is "LOL" there for? Something funny about any of this?

Do you know what the word "ideal" means?
 
" America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''

-Ronald Reagan, August 10, 1988

I knew ronnie was dumb but did he really say that??? America was certainly founded on race - the white race. America at the time was all white but for a few free blacks and millions of black slaves. The FF took white supremacy for granted.

Ain't that the FUCKING TRUTH!



Being anti-American doesn't make you 'progressive' or 'intellectual,' you asshole. Take a look at whose bed you just climbed into.
 
[
On the average, Asians are far more "productive" than caucasoids. And if one measures productivity based on labor cost per man hour, in most cases most Hispanics would be as well. Why else do you think that the "brilliant" whites who operate corporations in this country have outsourced so many jobs?

America has almost the highest corporate tax rate in the world. That's why we have outsourcing. THINK


You do not have a clue what you are saying.
Labor costs are the single largest controllable expense on most contribution statements, as well as the most fluid. Outsourcing jobs to India for example typically will yield a 20% reduction to that expense line compared to keeping the workforce in the U.S.

Why do you think so many corporations are stockpiling their liquid capital generated through profit outside of the country? It is because taxes are not paid on those profits unless the funds are here in America. Profit is what is left AFTER expenses.

That is why companies typically report what is called EBITDA(earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization)

Corporate tax breaks can be obtained in other ways, such as accelerating the payment schedule on certain capitalized expenses, as opposed to dragging them out year after year.

Even if all of the rabbits were pulled out of all of the hats, the best reduction that most would get would be down to the high 20 percentile range from the current average of 35%.

But outsourcing of jobs is not typically done to reduce the corporate tax rate.

You should consider tabeling your "black obsession" for awhile and read more about economics, because at the end of the day, the real divide in this country is more about class than it is race.
 
" America stands unique in the world: the only country not founded on race but on a way, an ideal. Not in spite of but because of our polyglot background, we have had all the strength in the world. That is the American way.''

-Ronald Reagan, August 10, 1988

LOL, if that's true, why did they keep the overwhelming majority of Blacks as slaves instead of allowing them to be Freemen? Why did they have the Black codes, Jim Crow, segregation, discrimination, and The Mulford Act.

What the fuck is "LOL" there for? Something funny about any of this?

Do you know what the word "ideal" means?

I know what the word 'ideal' means and I think that it's laughable that you don't think that this country wasn't founded on 'race'. How long after the Declaration of Independence and Constitution was enacted did slavery of Black people in this country end? How long after the aforementioned were the Native American Indians not being disenfranchised? If "all men were created equal" why didn't they free all of the slaves? Why did the allegedly 'free Blacks' have to walk around with the threat of being brutalized and enslaved?

Was Great Britain, Canada, France, Spain, Italy, Mali, Egypt, etc. "founded on race"? If you say yes, please qualify your statement with some concrete examples.
 
I knew ronnie was dumb but did he really say that??? America was certainly founded on race - the white race. America at the time was all white but for a few free blacks and millions of black slaves. The FF took white supremacy for granted.

Ain't that the FUCKING TRUTH!



Being anti-American doesn't make you 'progressive' or 'intellectual,' you asshole. Take a look at whose bed you just climbed into.

I'm not 'anti-American' you asshole, I live in 'real-ville'. Even though I think that the poster is a racist asshole, I still am objective enough to say that he was correct. I'm not "in bed" with them.
 
LOL, if that's true, why did they keep the overwhelming majority of Blacks as slaves instead of allowing them to be Freemen? Why did they have the Black codes, Jim Crow, segregation, discrimination, and The Mulford Act.

What the fuck is "LOL" there for? Something funny about any of this?

Do you know what the word "ideal" means?

I know what the word 'ideal' means and I think that it's laughable that you don't think that this country wasn't founded on 'race'.


It seems you really don't understand what the word "ideal" means, and you don't understand the prinicples this country was founded upon. Perhaps you've never even read our founding documents. You should. You may be laughing and enjoying your 'bliss' now, but it would be best for you to do something about your ignorance sooner or later.
 
Ain't that the FUCKING TRUTH!



Being anti-American doesn't make you 'progressive' or 'intellectual,' you asshole. Take a look at whose bed you just climbed into.

I'm not 'anti-American' you asshole, I live in 'real-ville'. Even though I think that the poster is a racist asshole, I still am objective enough to say that he was correct. I'm not "in bed" with them.



Your own words are right there for all to see, asshole. If you're not comfortable in the bed you've crawled into, then get out and stop being an anti-American piece of shit like these racist douchebags.
 
Being anti-American doesn't make you 'progressive' or 'intellectual,' you asshole. Take a look at whose bed you just climbed into.

I'm not 'anti-American' you asshole, I live in 'real-ville'. Even though I think that the poster is a racist asshole, I still am objective enough to say that he was correct. I'm not "in bed" with them.



Your own words are right there for all to see, asshole. If you're not comfortable in the bed you've crawled into, then get out and stop being an anti-American piece of shit like these racist douchebags.

If I may respectfully interject a thought, this dialogue reminds me of a discussion that I was part of a long time ago in a sociology class that had to do with Amercan "ideals". As I recall, "in theory", this nation was founded on a set of beliefs or ideals that all men regardless of race, creed or color were created equally, with indisputable rights of free speech, liberty and freedom.

However, the feasiblity of those ideals was flawed. The country still needed to operate, and in a capitalistic society model there are distinct classes of wealth, which the majority controls. Along with controlling the wealth, the majority also had the "freedom" to impose a set of oppressive laws to control their labor force and for the most part reduce their value to that of a beast of burden.

Slaves that were sold by their tribes or captured by slave traders arrived here not as humans, but as labor tools, intended solely for agricultural production and service to their masters.

Theoretically, the "ideals" were noble and well intended, but not realistic for the times, and the residual effects of the inherent flaws in how realistic they were, are still present in todays society.
 
Last edited:
I'm not 'anti-American' you asshole, I live in 'real-ville'. Even though I think that the poster is a racist asshole, I still am objective enough to say that he was correct. I'm not "in bed" with them.



Your own words are right there for all to see, asshole. If you're not comfortable in the bed you've crawled into, then get out and stop being an anti-American piece of shit like these racist douchebags.

If I may respectfully interject a thought, this dialogue reminds me of a discussion that I was part of a long time ago in a sociology class that had to do with Amercan "ideals". As I recall, "in theory", this nation was founded on a set of beliefs or ideals that all men regardless of race, creed or color were created equally, with indisputable rights of free, speech, liberty and freedom.

However, the feasiblity of those ideals was flawed. The country still needed to operate, and in a capitalistic society model there are distinct classes of wealth, which the majority controls. .


Nothing about our founding ideals is flawed other than the fact that too often we have failed to live up to them.

We don't have "distinct classes of wealth" in this country. A "distinct class" suggests a status into which one is born and from which one cannot - under normal circumstances - move. That is not the case in the United States.

It sounds like you were sold a load of bull from some fruity, far-left professor.
 
Your own words are right there for all to see, asshole. If you're not comfortable in the bed you've crawled into, then get out and stop being an anti-American piece of shit like these racist douchebags.

If I may respectfully interject a thought, this dialogue reminds me of a discussion that I was part of a long time ago in a sociology class that had to do with Amercan "ideals". As I recall, "in theory", this nation was founded on a set of beliefs or ideals that all men regardless of race, creed or color were created equally, with indisputable rights of free, speech, liberty and freedom.

However, the feasiblity of those ideals was flawed. The country still needed to operate, and in a capitalistic society model there are distinct classes of wealth, which the majority controls. .


Nothing about our founding ideals is flawed other than the fact that too often we have failed to live up to them.

I agree with that. It is incumbent upon those who are here now to change that. And as what I precieve to be a part of the new generation of thinkers, I ask you how do we change it?

We don't have "distinct classes of wealth" in this country. A "distinct class" suggests a status into which one is born and from which one cannot - under normal circumstances - move. That is not the case in the United States.

We most certainly did have "distinct classes" during the times that I referenced. If you look back at what I stated, I stated that I was referring to times past, not today, and as an editorial comment, there were laws at the time of founding and beyond into the early 20th century, that PROHIBITED certain people from being upwardly mobile in mainstream America.
Even homogenized versions of American history spell that fact out.

It sounds like you were sold a load of bull from some fruity, far-left professor.

By todays standards, he could possibly be considered "passe". But the discussion that I referred to was directed towards "American Ideals" and how they were actually practiced generations ago.

Keep in mind that this discussion was based on what the country was "founded on".... versus what was actually practiced at the time it was founded....so I thought.

I honestly do appreciate your passion for what the nation stands for on the world stage. And I will also say that the world needs more like you.

Just out of curiosity, how old are you? The only reason that I ask, is that I am close to 60.

I saw the "Civil Rights Movement", my own parents and grandparents marched down south during it's peak......mainly because they hoped to ensure that when I became an adult that the founding "ideals" would one day, also apply to me, because in many ways to them they were just words.
 
Last edited:
Whoops. Stumbled into another Republican thread. I wonder why minorities don't vote Republican? I just can't quite put my finger on it... Maybe it's because the GOP doesn't give minorities free stuff. That must be it! Stick to your principles, conservatives! Because principles like these will attract those minorities to your cause.
 
Whoops. Stumbled into another Republican thread. I wonder why minorities don't vote Republican? I just can't quite put my finger on it... Maybe it's because the GOP doesn't give minorities free stuff. That must be it! Stick to your principles, conservatives! Because principles like these will attract those minorities to your cause.

LMBAO! Since I have been posting in this cesspool(for entertainment), this must be the 100th time some person has made a statement insinuating in a very immature, childlike manner that minorities, (mostly blacks) get all of this
"free stuff".


I have asked over and over for someone to describe in detail what "free stuff"' they are referring to. And so far, no one has.
 

Forum List

Back
Top