Is racism on the rise?

That makes sense, if you think about it; if memory serves, the Black vote has gone about 90% democrat in the last several elections, so it's disingenuous to say that vote for Obama was race-based. I think there can be a better argument made, that Black voter turnout was higher because there was a Black candidate in the race who was electable. It seems normal enough human nature that this would have sparked more than ordinary interest in the Black community, because frankly this had not happened before.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, CC, but I would think there would be some element of racial pride involved here (I'm nor sure how it can be quantified), just because the situation was a first. Was that in fact the case to some extent, or did Whites overestimate it? Also, do you think Blacks have more of an emotional investment in Obama than they ordinarily would, (It's obvious many whites have one as well) or is this too, something that's been over-estimated and/or overemphasized?

It was, many believed that a black man wouldnt become the president at least anytime soon. Instead of that whites just want to believe something overly simple like "just because hes black" ignoring that blacks vote dem most of the time anyway. Blacks want Obama to do a good job because, frankly, blacks have to prove themselves in order to fight preconceived notions about blacks in general.

Like Tank likes to post vids of crazy black people then claim thats how all of them are. Even though Obama doesnt "go crazy" whites are waiting for it so he has to be more measured in his responses so he wont be seen as the "angry black man" or some other non sense.

No difference than if any other race or ethnicity found their way to the white house. Like I said Pailin was picked to court the female vote, Marco Rubio could and will court the hispanic vote, that indian guy (cant remember his name) would court that community and so forth. That's politics.
Wow!

A lib that has learned to face reality, other then the fact that blacks vote Democrat, but if the choice is between a white or a black Democrat they usually pick the black.

Wow!

An Idiot who cannot read
 
See, this is what I dont like. Here is a person, not black, that doesnt ask why someone voted for Obama, he assumes that blacks are so dumb that they just vote for whoever the black guy is. Sure, he's not saying blacks are dumb, or sheep or followers, he's just alluding to that being the case.

Maybe, just maybe...blacks agree with him and what he stood / stands for? Naw, couldnt be that

That makes sense, if you think about it; if memory serves, the Black vote has gone about 90% democrat in the last several elections, so it's disingenuous to say that vote for Obama was race-based. I think there can be a better argument made, that Black voter turnout was higher because there was a Black candidate in the race who was electable. It seems normal enough human nature that this would have sparked more than ordinary interest in the Black community, because frankly this had not happened before.

Correct me if I'm wrong here, CC, but I would think there would be some element of racial pride involved here (I'm nor sure how it can be quantified), just because the situation was a first. Was that in fact the case to some extent, or did Whites overestimate it? Also, do you think Blacks have more of an emotional investment in Obama than they ordinarily would, (It's obvious many whites have one as well) or is this too, something that's been over-estimated and/or overemphasized?

It was, many believed that a black man wouldnt become the president at least anytime soon. Instead of that whites just want to believe something overly simple like "just because hes black" ignoring that blacks vote dem most of the time anyway. Blacks want Obama to do a good job because, frankly, blacks have to prove themselves in order to fight preconceived notions about blacks in general.

Like Tank likes to post vids of crazy black people then claim thats how all of them are. Even though Obama doesnt "go crazy" whites are waiting for it so he has to be more measured in his responses so he wont be seen as the "angry black man" or some other non sense.

No difference than if any other race or ethnicity found their way to the white house. Like I said Pailin was picked to court the female vote, Marco Rubio could and will court the hispanic vote, that indian guy (cant remember his name) would court that community and so forth. That's politics.
Thank you, CC. That's pretty much the sense I had of it, after talking with Black friends of mine. I think with those in my age group especially (those old enough to remember Jim Crow), there was an embracing of what seemed at first an "impossible dream"; I think that feeling was intensified by how close we still are (in historical time) to that era.

I also get the sense that the idea of Black people "having to prove themselves"is still very much a part of the psyche of Black America, as it was when we were emerging from the era of segregation; it's evident despite the fact that most Blacks have joined the middle class (or above) since then. Of course, what is often forgotten (or not understood) is that there was already a thriving middle and upper-middle and professional class within the segregated Black communities even in the bad old days, so there was a foundation in place; and as more doors opened, even more joined them. That prosperity, (and it is a marvel of achievement in its own right) often gets overlooked by some Whites, because of the disproportionate number of Blacks still trapped in poverty, but the truth is, that there are many more Blacks in the economic and social mainstream than there are on welfare. Part of that misperception may be simple demographics; we have a lot of the White population living in areas where there are so relatively few Black people, that there's little interaction with them on a daily basis, hence old perceptions flourish. That's what happens when most of one's conceptions of another race come not from personal experience, but from the papers and the evening news (where bad news and dysfunctional behavior make headlines) Here in the South, of course, that's not the case; we can hardly avoid interacting with one another on a day-to-day basis, and the resulting transformation of attitudes has been amazing; still very much a work in progress, but something that gives me great hope for the future.
 
It was, many believed that a black man wouldnt become the president at least anytime soon. Instead of that whites just want to believe something overly simple like "just because hes black" ignoring that blacks vote dem most of the time anyway. Blacks want Obama to do a good job because, frankly, blacks have to prove themselves in order to fight preconceived notions about blacks in general.

Like Tank likes to post vids of crazy black people then claim thats how all of them are. Even though Obama doesnt "go crazy" whites are waiting for it so he has to be more measured in his responses so he wont be seen as the "angry black man" or some other non sense.

No difference than if any other race or ethnicity found their way to the white house. Like I said Pailin was picked to court the female vote, Marco Rubio could and will court the hispanic vote, that indian guy (cant remember his name) would court that community and so forth. That's politics.
Wow!

A lib that has learned to face reality, other then the fact that blacks vote Democrat, but if the choice is between a white or a black Democrat they usually pick the black.

Wow!

An Idiot who cannot read

I tested out in 6th grade at a 12th grade level.

I understand what you said.

You just were unclear. You gave an excuse that everyone does it, which is bogus. . Whites don't vote according to race. That part seems to have escaped you. Minorities vote according to race.
 
Last edited:
The criticism of Obama that is related to his policies is not considered racist. It is the criticism of his ersonal motivations that is racist.
 
The jews were persecuted primarily somewhere other than america. They were discriminated agianst here, but no to the extent of blacks. No one has been treated in america like blacks-period.
 
So, every black should be grateful for not being "left" in africa. What about all of the immigrants who flocked here from Italy and Irelan and elsewhere. Italians and Irish were starving to death in some of those countries-give me a break.
 
The jews were persecuted primarily somewhere other than america. They were discriminated agianst here, but no to the extent of blacks. No one has been treated in america like blacks-period.

True.

Blacks were brought here as slaves and their Grandkids ended up getting a better deal then those who remain behind.

But FYI, Native-Americans got a worse deal. This was their home and now they live in poverty for the most part. This doesn't include casino owners of course.
 
To put all of this in simpler terms, if you feel you are a member of the oppressed you don't give a shit if the candidate is compitent, as long as he is someone you can identify with.
 
@ mud

No matter what I say you are going to translate it IMO something completely different than what I said. Beat up those strawman all you want
 
@ mud

No matter what I say you are going to translate it IMO something completely different than what I said. Beat up those strawman all you want

I'm not trying to be a jerk. I'm just trying to engage you in a dialog so I can understand what you mean.

However, I will go back and re-read it and see if there is another meaning that escapes me.
 
Part of what's making racial reconciliation difficult, I think, is that we're dealing with a difference in perceptions caused by a difference in perspective.

Let me suggest another possibility.

We aren't dealing with a "difference in perceptions."

We aren't dealing with a "difference in perspective."

We are dealing with reality.

Race is real. A physical reality. A biological reality. A genetic reality.

An evolutionary reality.

Our clustering by race is as natural as a mother's preference for her own children over her neighbor's children. There's no moral failing about it. We aren't going to "get over" race any more than we're going to "get over" male and female, water running down hill and the rising and setting of the sun.

Neither left nor right is correct in their "solutions" for race.

The left is WRRONG that if we just give blacks and Hispanics enough goodies, racial conflict will go away.

The right is WRONG that if blacks all vote Republican, racial conflict will go away.

Racial conflict will go away when racial conflict goes away.

How do we get there?

Separate the races.
 
Last edited:
Seems that instead of it lessening, its getting stronger. I thought Obama being the first black (half black) president would be encouragement for the races to "settle in" and it not be as bad. And although I know its still rampant in this country, it seemed to be lightening up a smidge and folks were more tolerant...or trying to be, anyway. But to me, since Obama got in office, it is rising to higher pitch.
Or is it just me?

It's not just you, but I wouldn't be concerned about it. As the population trends toward majority-minority, you're going to see more lashing out. Several possible outcomes in the longer run:

- People get over silly social constructs like race and actually behave like mature adults.

- Our politics breaks down into ethnic tribal conflicts.

Yes, whites demonstrate they're "mature adults" by letting Hispanics run wild across their country and giving up their jobs on the police force to unqualified blacks. There is no corresponding duty for blacks or Hispanics.

What has the world shown us? Every political conflict the world over has an element of ethnic tribal conflicts... whether overt or otherwise.

Race is not a "silly social construct." It's a biological reality.
 
Part of what's making racial reconciliation difficult, I think, is that we're dealing with a difference in perceptions caused by a difference in perspective.

Let me suggest another possibility.

We aren't dealing with a "difference in perceptions."

We aren't dealing with a "difference in perspective."

We are dealing with reality.

Race is real. A physical reality. A biological reality. A genetic reality.

An evolutionary reality.

Our clustering by race is as natural as a mother's preference for her own children over her neighbor's children. There's no moral failing about it.

In a way it's just insecurity. Some people are more comfortable around people of their own race. However, I've lived with blacks, Native-Americans, Muslims, Hispanics, and it's all the same to me once you get through all of the stereotypes.

Problem is if you get enough people of the same race or group together they start taking sides. Pretty soon the one odd person out becomes a focal point.

As I told Closed Captioned, blacks feel for the most part like they're oppressed so they'll vote in great numbers for any damn fool as long as he's black. Marion Berry, Ray Nagan, Sheila Jackson-Lee, John Conyers, Barack Obama, Carol Moseley Braun, William Jefferson, Harold Ford Jr., Maxine Waters, Kwame Kilpatrick to name a few.

Sure they want them to be good, but they will settle for black. If one of them turns out to be incompitent one of their favorite sayings is "Sure he's an idiot, but he's our idiot".
 
Last edited:
I think consciousness of race as anything other than an obvious physical characteristic is learned behavior. If it was inate or something people were born with, young children would segregate themselves into groups by racial characteristics. They don't. Not before they are taught to do so.
 

Forum List

Back
Top