Let's Have The Talk We Hear So Much About But Never Happens

What does the 'black community' mean? No other race gets singled out as a 'community'. I find the term slightly demeaning to the very people it is supposed to support.

Well, I kind of agree with you. I can only say what it means to me. For me it means our people as in race in the country we live in as a whole.

It is demeaning as it lumps us all into a collective, but that isn't how I mean it.

But.... you agree that 'our people' is really all Americans - regardless of their skin color? Don't you get bored with being identified by your color rather than your citizenship? Why can't we just see Americans?
you are a stupid bitch !!!:clap2:
 
Yes. And? Care to tell me why I should give a shit?

I dont know but it seems that you do :D

See when you say someone has on a tinfoil hat, then agrees with that same person on the point he was making. It kind of hurts your first point. It's ok dude...I'm sure you didnt mean too make yourself look like an ass

WTF are you talking about now?
Basically you are whining that people don't want to understand your view and then turning around and saying that you don't want to understand the views of others.

fwiw, I think you are a phony and I have no desire to understand your view.
 
I dont know but it seems that you do :D

See when you say someone has on a tinfoil hat, then agrees with that same person on the point he was making. It kind of hurts your first point. It's ok dude...I'm sure you didnt mean too make yourself look like an ass

WTF are you talking about now?
Basically you are whining that people don't want to understand your view and then turning around and saying that you don't want to understand the views of others.

fwiw, I think you are a phony and I have no desire to understand your view.
You're not intelligent enough to understand my positions, so I wouldnt waste my time explaining my positions to you. Whining? Lol! Right...

I already understand their viewpoints, that's why I said they don't want to understand mine. I know everything you stand for, Ravioli. That's why I'm against it.
 
I will probably regret this............but here goes:

Liability,

In several posts in this thread, you suggested that this country has, as it is exceptional, come a long way toward reaching the ideal state where race is no longer a factor to be considered. Whereas, in the past, a racist being called a racist took no offense.....................now, the charge of racism is considered offensive. Such a long way.

But, our march toward equality for all is still a work in progress, you claim. And.....pointing out our continued failure to reach the goal............is counterproductive.

Why? Why is it acceptable to you that we have yet to reach this goal. What steps do you think need to be taken to hasten our progress in reaching this goal. Is even one more day..........a minute even.......where this nation has not met that goal even the least bit acceptable?

..........................................................

LonelyLaughable:

Your prose is ponderous and your "thoughts" barely decipherable.

Not only did I never say that pointing out that we have not yet reached the goal is "counterproductive," there's no hint of that in anything I did say.

It is all well and good to continue to note it. It can serve to spur us on. To that extent, I am all for it.

Nonetheless, it is kind of dishonest to refuse to take note of the fact that we HAVE made progress. I am not claiming that we have earned the right to rest on our laurels. I am suggesting that it's not a bad idea to take some satisfaction from the progress we have made -- which might also serve to spur us on.

THEN you proceed to ask a dishonest question, "Why is it acceptable to you that we have yet to reach this goal[?]" I never said or suggested that it was, you cretin.

Why is it so difficult for idiots like you to accept with SOME measure of satisfaction that we have CHOSEN to move in the right direction?

The steps we need to take should be measured against the actual benefits. Take so-called Affirmative Action, for example. To whatever extent it once had a firmer basis to exist, the question is whether or not it is NOW still acceptable to take such note of "color" to remedy past discrimination? If it once was a fair-minded course, to deny the progress we have made allows for AA to proceed without regard to the fact that today there is far smaller "present day effect of past discrimination" than there was when AA first got started.
 
I have a question for you, Lockejaw. Just last weekend, I spent the weekend in Charlottesville, VA. I visited the homes of both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The experience was fascinating, and I felt deeply conflicted by it all. These were men of privilege, and despite their virtues, essentially rich kids. Yet they laid out a framework for government that promised more freedom to more people than any the earth had yet seen (eventually).

But the profound contradiction, in touring their estates, was the ubiquitous spectre of slavery that propped it all up. Both Jefferson and Madison owned over hundred slaves each and, though they seemed to recognize it for the evil institution it was, neither were willing to forgo the benefits of indulging it. This gnaws at me. I can't imagine how you must view it.

I was particularly struck by an entry in one of Madison's journals where he described the conundrum of having taken a slave with him to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia. He recognized that after being exposed to the profound ideas of freedom for all men that they were codifying into law, he couldn't allow the slave in question to return to his estate and mix with the other slaves - he KNEW what that would mean. He concluded that the only thing he could do was to sell him in Pennsylvania (where slaves could be held for a maximum of seven years) and take a 'loss' on his 'investment'.

And the question part?

oh.. I guess I'm just wondering how black people (especially those who admire the accomplishments of people like Jefferson and Madison) resolve this. I have a hard time with it myself. I can't imagine what it must be like for people who are direct descendants of its victims.

Ah. I see now. Didn't mean to be obtuse. That question is interesting (albeit one not directed at some melanin-challenged dude like me).
 
When it comes to something as basic............as foundational to what this nation is.....as the equality of men....there is absolutely no satisfaction to be had from the journey. None to be derived for getting part of the way there. We either are or we are not the example for others to follow. In this respect.......we are not.
 
When it comes to something as basic............as foundational to what this nation is.....as the equality of men....there is absolutely no satisfaction to be had from the journey. None to be derived for getting part of the way there. We either are or we are not the example for others to follow. In this respect.......we are not.

It's a relative measure. You will never eradicate fear from the hearts of men completely. However, we are miles ahead of the rest of the world.
 
Sorry. I don't accept that freedom and equality are relative measures. Either this nation is what it claims to be............or it is not.

This nation has adopted laws to ensure that fear in the hearts of ( some ) men is inconsequential when it comes to the rights of all citizens. The fact that these laws have not been adhered to is an indictment on all of us.
 
I have a question for you, Lockejaw. Just last weekend, I spent the weekend in Charlottesville, VA. I visited the homes of both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The experience was fascinating, and I felt deeply conflicted by it all. These were men of privilege, and despite their virtues, essentially rich kids. Yet they laid out a framework for government that promised more freedom to more people than any the earth had yet seen (eventually).

But the profound contradiction, in touring their estates, was the ubiquitous spectre of slavery that propped it all up. Both Jefferson and Madison owned over hundred slaves each and, though they seemed to recognize it for the evil institution it was, neither were willing to forgo the benefits of indulging it. This gnaws at me. I can't imagine how you must view it.

I was particularly struck by an entry in one of Madison's journals where he described the conundrum of having taken a slave with him to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia. He recognized that after being exposed to the profound ideas of freedom for all men that they were codifying into law, he couldn't allow the slave in question to return to his estate and mix with the other slaves - he KNEW what that would mean. He concluded that the only thing he could do was to sell him in Pennsylvania (where slaves could be held for a maximum of seven years) and take a 'loss' on his 'investment'.
Can only speak for myself, but I can forgive them for being human and not trying to rock the boat with their fellow countrymen despite the fact I find slavery to be THE most evil institution to ever exist.

This reminds of the time I was still a young guy and I always sat at the back of the city bus. Hey, those are the most comfortable seats usually! One of my friends who rode with me to work would always bitch about me going to the back and refused to sit back there until one day he decided to follow me back and said" why do you always sit in the back, back in the day they FORCED you to sit in the back!". I thought it was ridiculous how he transformed me into Rosa Parks and how he forgot about the great strides we as a society have made thanks to people like Parks I can sit wherever I damn well please.
 
I have a question for you, Lockejaw. Just last weekend, I spent the weekend in Charlottesville, VA. I visited the homes of both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The experience was fascinating, and I felt deeply conflicted by it all. These were men of privilege, and despite their virtues, essentially rich kids. Yet they laid out a framework for government that promised more freedom to more people than any the earth had yet seen (eventually).

But the profound contradiction, in touring their estates, was the ubiquitous spectre of slavery that propped it all up. Both Jefferson and Madison owned over hundred slaves each and, though they seemed to recognize it for the evil institution it was, neither were willing to forgo the benefits of indulging it. This gnaws at me. I can't imagine how you must view it.

I was particularly struck by an entry in one of Madison's journals where he described the conundrum of having taken a slave with him to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia. He recognized that after being exposed to the profound ideas of freedom for all men that they were codifying into law, he couldn't allow the slave in question to return to his estate and mix with the other slaves - he KNEW what that would mean. He concluded that the only thing he could do was to sell him in Pennsylvania (where slaves could be held for a maximum of seven years) and take a 'loss' on his 'investment'.
Can only speak for myself, but I can forgive them for being human and not trying to rock the boat with their fellow countrymen despite the fact I find slavery to be THE most evil institution to ever exist.

This reminds of the time I was still a young guy and I always sat at the back of the city bus. Hey, those are the most comfortable seats usually! One of my friends who rode with me to work would always bitch about me going to the back and refused to sit back there until one day he decided to follow me back and said" why do you always sit in the back, back in the day they FORCED you to sit in the back!". I thought it was ridiculous how he transformed me into Rosa Parks and how he forgot about the great strides we as a society have made thanks to people like Parks I can sit wherever I damn well please.

Your comment is unbelievably sad. If blacks and whites hadn't "rocked the boat" we'd still have Jim Crow/Institutionalized racism today. Abolitionist were rocking the boat at the same time that Jefferson and Madison were going along to get along.

They had slaves because they didn't consider blacks to be humans.
 
They had slaves because they didn't consider blacks to be humans.

Fact is they still own YOU to this day.

No they don't. But you keep believing that so that you can justify your feelings about blacks.

Why will 98% of Mormons vote for Romney?

What has the republican party done for white conservative evangelical Christians? Have they ended Roe? Put prayer back in school? Ended the NEA, Depart of Ed or Planned Parenthood?

What have they done for the overwhelming support?
 
Last edited:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal..."

That's one of the basic truths that America was founded on.

Yet this "basic truth" seems frustratingly elusive... even within racial and ethnic groups, human beings vary widely in their intelligence and abilities. I think there are equalities to consider: equality before God, equality before the law. But to declare that "created equal" is a "basic truth that America was founded on" ignores way too much evidence to the contrary, both in terms of measurable reality and in terms of what the founding fathers thought. Check out Federalist No. 2 if you think that "diversity" is a "founding American value".

Or check out Russell Kirk's writings on "equality" in The Conservative Mind to see what a real conservative had to say.
 
I have a question for you, Lockejaw. Just last weekend, I spent the weekend in Charlottesville, VA. I visited the homes of both Thomas Jefferson and James Madison. The experience was fascinating, and I felt deeply conflicted by it all. These were men of privilege, and despite their virtues, essentially rich kids. Yet they laid out a framework for government that promised more freedom to more people than any the earth had yet seen (eventually).

But the profound contradiction, in touring their estates, was the ubiquitous spectre of slavery that propped it all up. Both Jefferson and Madison owned over hundred slaves each and, though they seemed to recognize it for the evil institution it was, neither were willing to forgo the benefits of indulging it. This gnaws at me. I can't imagine how you must view it.

I was particularly struck by an entry in one of Madison's journals where he described the conundrum of having taken a slave with him to the constitutional convention in Philadelphia. He recognized that after being exposed to the profound ideas of freedom for all men that they were codifying into law, he couldn't allow the slave in question to return to his estate and mix with the other slaves - he KNEW what that would mean. He concluded that the only thing he could do was to sell him in Pennsylvania (where slaves could be held for a maximum of seven years) and take a 'loss' on his 'investment'.
Can only speak for myself, but I can forgive them for being human and not trying to rock the boat with their fellow countrymen despite the fact I find slavery to be THE most evil institution to ever exist.

This reminds of the time I was still a young guy and I always sat at the back of the city bus. Hey, those are the most comfortable seats usually! One of my friends who rode with me to work would always bitch about me going to the back and refused to sit back there until one day he decided to follow me back and said" why do you always sit in the back, back in the day they FORCED you to sit in the back!". I thought it was ridiculous how he transformed me into Rosa Parks and how he forgot about the great strides we as a society have made thanks to people like Parks I can sit wherever I damn well please.

Your comment is unbelievably sad. If blacks and whites hadn't "rocked the boat" we'd still have Jim Crow/Institutionalized racism today. Abolitionist were rocking the boat at the same time that Jefferson and Madison were going along to get along.

They had slaves because they didn't consider blacks to be humans.


I'm sure many of them rationalized it that way, but it's not quite that simple. Though many of the founders wanted to outlaw slavery from the beginning, even some of those who owned slaves, to do so would have made the union of the colonies impossible. The southern states simply wouldn't have agreed to give up slavery to join the union. And they felt that not unifying the states would have made them vulnerable to reprisal from the British as well as other nations.

It's not clear to me how the founders who did recognize the evil of slavery rationalized their own continued ownership of slaves. There was definitely a lot 'invested' in the myth that blacks were somehow racially inferior, but I'm not sure how much they really believed that. The plantation owners in the south were competing with other plantations, and slavery was economically advantageous, so they may have believed that giving up slavery was the equivalent of giving up their plantations - a void which would have been filled by others without such moral misgivings. But that's pretty weak in my view. Ultimately, there's no way of getting around the hypocrisy at the heart of it all.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top