Please stop trying tell black people about MLK

[IM2]

You see how the story shifted? When I pointed out that Blacks actually received "Reparations" in the form of millions of acres of land, it then became a "Yeah but they lost their land because RACISM....". What a surprise.

The story didn't shift. The part you left out was shown.

No, you said it never happened.
As all of your threads go, either you were ignorant or a liar.
I was ignorant on the numbers but I'm not intellectually dishonest like you are. I can admit it.
So which were you?

It didn't happen. And you are very intellectually dishonest.

On January 16, 1865, after completing his march to the Georgia coast, General Sherman issued Special Field Orders No. 15 that established the provision ‘‘of not more than (40) forty acres of tillable ground’’ designated ‘‘for the settlement of the negroes now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.’’ The territory to be settled under Sherman’s orders included ‘‘[t]he islands from Charleston, south of the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns River’’ (Sherman, 2003:325–27).

More expansively, the Freedman’s Bureau Act of March 3, 1865, pursuant to the Southern land confiscation acts of 1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864, had an explicit racial land redistribution provision. Again, ‘‘not more than 40 acres’’ of land was to be provided to refugee or freedman male citizens at three years’ annual rent not exceeding 6 percent of the value of the land based on appraisal of the state tax authorities in 1860. At the end of the three years, the occupants could purchase the land and receive title. Similar provisions were included in the postwar Southern Homestead Act of 1866; freedmen were to receive land in the southern states at a price of $5 for 80 acres. Neither of these Acts were implemented on behalf of the ex-slaves with any degree of vigor given the fierce opposition of President Andrew Johnson. By the end of 1865, Johnson also had ordered the removal of former slaves from the coastal lands they had settled under the conditions of Sherman’s Special Field Orders No. 15. The lands ultimately were restored to the former slave owners (see Friedman, 1996; McPherson, 1964; Shabazz, 1994).

Forty Acres and a Mule in the 21st Century
William Darity, Jr., Duke University
Article in Social Science Quarterly · February 2008

 

[IM2]

You and your family have benefited from racism. All that what I didn't do stuff is weak. You didn't put NA's on reservations but you pay them every year.

How would you know that I benefited from racism?

You just made a blanket statement about me without having any facts, based solely on my race.

The BIA is complete bullshit and reparations should stop immediately, but you're right. We who had no part in conquering Native Americans are being held responsible to pay reparations to Native American decedents who were never mistreated. That is fucking horseshit, and black folks are not being treated equally.

The BIA needs to fold. It's only fair.

.

There was no blanket statement made and you have benefited from racism whether you like that being said or not. As for the NA's they are living under occupation. As long as that's the case, they deserve reparations.

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

I'm not. But I am telling whites who are racists to stop being racist.

How?

Even when I try to not be racist, you tell me I am being racist. What can I do to stop being racist?

.

Maybe you learn that when an actual black person tells you what the problem is in black communities you accept that as the problem.

Name the black country where you've even remotely solved your 3rd World problems.

Maybe, for once in your life, YOU should listen to the successful and quit blaming them for your problems

I will reject opinions from crooks that colonized nations and continue to steal their wealth.

Now stick to the topic.

Your greed makes you blind.

 

[TNHarley]

You see how the story shifted? When I pointed out that Blacks actually received "Reparations" in the form of millions of acres of land, it then became a "Yeah but they lost their land because RACISM....". What a surprise.

The story didn't shift. The part you left out was shown.

No, you said it never happened.
As all of your threads go, either you were ignorant or a liar.
I was ignorant on the numbers but I'm not intellectually dishonest like you are. I can admit it.
So which were you?

It didn't happen. And you are very intellectually dishonest.

On January 16, 1865, after completing his march to the Georgia coast, General Sherman issued Special Field Orders No. 15 that established the provision ‘‘of not more than (40) forty acres of tillable ground’’ designated ‘‘for the settlement of the negroes now made free by the acts of war and the proclamation of the President of the United States.’’ The territory to be settled under Sherman’s orders included ‘‘[t]he islands from Charleston, south of the abandoned rice fields along the rivers for thirty miles back from the sea, and the country bordering the St. Johns River’’ (Sherman, 2003:325–27).

More expansively, the Freedman’s Bureau Act of March 3, 1865, pursuant to the Southern land confiscation acts of 1861, 1862, 1863, and 1864, had an explicit racial land redistribution provision. Again, ‘‘not more than 40 acres’’ of land was to be provided to refugee or freedman male citizens at three years’ annual rent not exceeding 6 percent of the value of the land based on appraisal of the state tax authorities in 1860. At the end of the three years, the occupants could purchase the land and receive title. Similar provisions were included in the postwar Southern Homestead Act of 1866; freedmen were to receive land in the southern states at a price of $5 for 80 acres. Neither of these Acts were implemented on behalf of the ex-slaves with any degree of vigor given the fierce opposition of President Andrew Johnson. By the end of 1865, Johnson also had ordered the removal of former slaves from the coastal lands they had settled under the conditions of Sherman’s Special Field Orders No. 15. The lands ultimately were restored to the former slave owners (see Friedman, 1996; McPherson, 1964; Shabazz, 1994).

Forty Acres and a Mule in the 21st Century
William Darity, Jr., Duke University
Article in Social Science Quarterly · February 2008

Dude you fuckin said 15m acres went to blacks.
Its truly sickening that racism makes you this much of a dishonest piece of shit.
Your life must really suck!
The homestead act of 1866 specifically stated free blacks could get land.
STFU

 

[CarlinAnnArbor]

You and your family have benefited from racism. All that what I didn't do stuff is weak. You didn't put NA's on reservations but you pay them every year.

How would you know that I benefited from racism?

You just made a blanket statement about me without having any facts, based solely on my race.

The BIA is complete bullshit and reparations should stop immediately, but you're right. We who had no part in conquering Native Americans are being held responsible to pay reparations to Native American decedents who were never mistreated. That is fucking horseshit, and black folks are not being treated equally.

The BIA needs to fold. It's only fair.

.

There was no blanket statement made and you have benefited from racism whether you like that being said or not. As for the NA's they are living under occupation. As long as that's the case, they deserve reparations.

Why do you tell me to stick to the topic of your thread when you wander all over the place?

WHAT was the topic again????

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

There was no blanket statement made and you have benefited from racism whether you like that being said or not

How?

As for the NA's they are living under occupation. As long as that's the case, they deserve reparations.

I disagree on the occupation thing. That can go on forever.

Celts are being occupied by Bretons who are being occupied by Anglo-Saxons who are being occupied partially by Scandinavians who and now by Normans.

Nutufians are being occupied by Canaanites who are being occupied by Egyptians who are being occupied by Israelites who are being occupied by Babylonians who are being occupied by the Romans who are being occupied by the Turks who are being occupied by the FUCKING BRITS who are being occupied by the Palestinians who are being occupied by the Israelis.

A BUNCH of African tribes are being occupied by Zulus.

Where does it end?

Who says they should get ANYTHING?

Conquest can only be rectified by more conquest. We're talking war.

Is that the goal?

.

 

[MizMolly]

Long after the only words the white racists think King ever spoke, he said these words:

"We're Coming To Get Our Check"



We blacks know what King was about. And we will not whitewash it to serve your need to lie to yourselves.

Do you even remotely understand how RACIST your statement is? I dont care if you're racist, but that seems to be important to you

My statement was not racist.

"We blacks know....." is RACIST

LOL! There is nothing racist about saying we blacks know what a historic black figure is about. Whites like you try making up racism when you don't like what a person of color says. The whites who argue with us about how King would not approve of us based on taking one sentence out of his life do not know shit about King. We blacks know what King is about because we recognize more than that one sentence that is disingenuously used by many whites here.

How ironic. YOU are the one calling whites racist when they aren’t.

 

[MizMolly]

So what exactly are you trying to say?

Please stop trying tell black people about MLK

What is this about knowing what he was about? What about do you think he was, and how is it different than the about others allegedly think he was?

King was not colorblind. And King held whites accountable for their continuing racism until he was murdered. But to some whites here at USMB, if we hold whites accountable for continuing racism we are not adhering to Kings belief based on one sentence in a speech they use to try shutting us up because we call out their racism.

King was not a conservative republican and he certainly would not be a republican today. If King had adhered to the things the racists who are white in this forum claim, his children would support the republican party. We as blacks know this. There are whites here who if you have them tell it, he'd be a Trump supporting member of the Freedom Caucus.

I see what you're saying. You think that MLK was a racist. But you are wrong. King didn't hold whites responsible for racism, nor did he claim that whites as a whole were racist.

You have just made one of the most ignorant comments of all time.

“Whenever any black person utters words that make white people adjust their collars, white people unfailingly respond with a variation of the phrase “but not all white people.” If they are bold enough, they might even challenge you with the Super Saiyan Caucasian preamble of all preambles: “What would Martin Luther King say about ...”

Michael Harriot​

I am 100 percent correct. King did hold whites responsible for racism. All whites. He held the whites who claimed non racism but did nothing just as accountable as the racists.

“First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
​

And this is why I say:

Please stop trying tell black people about MLK

Holding all white people accountable is racist. If someone is not racist but cannot stop others from being so, you can’t force anyone to stop being what they are.

 

[MizMolly]

What is this about knowing what he was about? What about do you think he was, and how is it different than the about others allegedly think he was?

King was not colorblind. And King held whites accountable for their continuing racism until he was murdered. But to some whites here at USMB, if we hold whites accountable for continuing racism we are not adhering to Kings belief based on one sentence in a speech they use to try shutting us up because we call out their racism.

King was not a conservative republican and he certainly would not be a republican today. If King had adhered to the things the racists who are white in this forum claim, his children would support the republican party. We as blacks know this. There are whites here who if you have them tell it, he'd be a Trump supporting member of the Freedom Caucus.

I see what you're saying. You think that MLK was a racist. But you are wrong. King didn't hold whites responsible for racism, nor did he claim that whites as a whole were racist.

You have just made one of the most ignorant comments of all time.

“Whenever any black person utters words that make white people adjust their collars, white people unfailingly respond with a variation of the phrase “but not all white people.” If they are bold enough, they might even challenge you with the Super Saiyan Caucasian preamble of all preambles: “What would Martin Luther King say about ...”

Michael Harriot​

I am 100 percent correct. King did hold whites responsible for racism. All whites. He held the whites who claimed non racism but did nothing just as accountable as the racists.

“First, I must confess that over the past few years I have been gravely disappointed with the white moderate. I have almost reached the regrettable conclusion that the Negro's great stumbling block in his stride toward freedom is not the White Citizen's Counciler or the Ku Klux Klanner, but the white moderate, who is more devoted to "order" than to justice; who prefers a negative peace which is the absence of tension to a positive peace which is the presence of justice; who constantly says: "I agree with you in the goal you seek, but I cannot agree with your methods of direct action"; who paternalistically believes he can set the timetable for another man's freedom; who lives by a mythical concept of time and who constantly advises the Negro to wait for a "more convenient season." Shallow understanding from people of good will is more frustrating than absolute misunderstanding from people of ill will. Lukewarm acceptance is much more bewildering than outright rejection."

Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
​

And this is why I say:

Please stop trying tell black people about MLK

You should really stop trying to tell white people about white people.

I'm not. But I am telling whites who are racists to stop being racist.

But you tell non racist whites the same thing

 

[hadit]

Long after the only words the white racists think King ever spoke, he said these words:

"We're Coming To Get Our Check"



We blacks know what King was about. And we will not whitewash it to serve your need to lie to yourselves.

Does this mean you will be consistent and stop telling others about famous white people?

 

[MizMolly]

I'm not. But I am telling whites who are racists to stop being racist.

How?

Even when I try to not be racist, you tell me I am being racist. What can I do to stop being racist?

.

Stop being white

 

[MizMolly]

I'm not. But I am telling whites who are racists to stop being racist.

How?

Even when I try to not be racist, you tell me I am being racist. What can I do to stop being racist?

.

Maybe you learn that when an actual black person tells you what the problem is in black communities you accept that as the problem.

Ok, it’s a problem, now what?

 

[MizMolly]

The 1890 census was destroyed. Where are you getting that information?

The homestead acts.
Racism still kept many blacks from getting it but MANY did.

Southern blacks didn't own millions of anything. Both my parents were from the south.

Yea, idk about millions of acres, but many got land.

Google it, Black land ownership post Civil War was nearly 15 million acres by 1910.

It's funny how some whites here take half a story then useit to argue against fact.

In the 45 years following the Civil War, freed
 slaves and their descendants accumulated roughly 15 million acres of land across the United States, most of it in the South. Land ownership meant stability and opportunity for black families, a shot at upward mobility and economic security for future generations. The hard-won property was generally used for farming, the primary occupation of most Southern blacks in the early 20th century. By 1920, there were 925,000 black-owned farms, representing about 14 percent of all farms in the United States.

Over the course of the 20th century, however, that number dropped precipitously. Millions of farmers of all races were pushed off their land in the early part of the century, including around 600,000 black farmers. By 1975, just 45,000 black-owned farms remained. “It was almost as if the earth was opening up and swallowing black farmers,” writes scholar Pete Daniel in his book Dispossession: Discrimination Against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights. Implicit in the decline of black farming was the loss of the land those farmers once tilled. Today, African Americans compose less than 2 percent of the nation’s farmers and 1 percent of its 
rural landowners.

Many factors contributed to the loss of black-owned land during the 20th century, including systemic discrimination in lending by the US Department of Agriculture, the industrialization that lured workers into factories, and the Great Migration. But the lesser-known issue of heirs’ property also played a role, allowing untold thousands of acres to be forcibly bought out from under black rural families—often second-, third-, or fourth-generation landowners whose ancestors were 
enslaved—by real-estate developers and speculators.

By one estimate, 81 percent of these early black landowners didn’t make wills, largely due to a lack of access to legal resources. Their descendants then inherited the land without a clear title, and it thereby became designated as heirs’ property. Although heirs’ property exists in many regions of the country, it’s most prevalent in low-income communities. In the South, according to one estimate, more than 50 percent of heirs’-property owners are African-American, many of them the descendants of slaves and sharecroppers.

Without a clear title, heirs’-property owners are limited in what they can do with their land. They can’t get mortgages or do extensive repairs on their homes; as a consequence, some live in trailers. They aren’t eligible to apply for state or federal housing aid (such as funds provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency) or for nearly any of the programs administered by the Department of Agriculture, including the crucial loans and conservation funding that keep many rural landowners afloat.

African Americans Have Lost Untold Acres of Land Over the Last Century

So have whites

 

[MizMolly]

Google it, Black land ownership post Civil War was nearly 15 million acres by 1910.

It's funny how some whites here take half a story then useit to argue against fact.

In the 45 years following the Civil War, freed
 slaves and their descendants accumulated roughly 15 million acres of land across the United States, most of it in the South. Land ownership meant stability and opportunity for black families, a shot at upward mobility and economic security for future generations. The hard-won property was generally used for farming, the primary occupation of most Southern blacks in the early 20th century. By 1920, there were 925,000 black-owned farms, representing about 14 percent of all farms in the United States.

Over the course of the 20th century, however, that number dropped precipitously. Millions of farmers of all races were pushed off their land in the early part of the century, including around 600,000 black farmers. By 1975, just 45,000 black-owned farms remained. “It was almost as if the earth was opening up and swallowing black farmers,” writes scholar Pete Daniel in his book Dispossession: Discrimination Against African American Farmers in the Age of Civil Rights. Implicit in the decline of black farming was the loss of the land those farmers once tilled. Today, African Americans compose less than 2 percent of the nation’s farmers and 1 percent of its 
rural landowners.

Many factors contributed to the loss of black-owned land during the 20th century, including systemic discrimination in lending by the US Department of Agriculture, the industrialization that lured workers into factories, and the Great Migration. But the lesser-known issue of heirs’ property also played a role, allowing untold thousands of acres to be forcibly bought out from under black rural families—often second-, third-, or fourth-generation landowners whose ancestors were 
enslaved—by real-estate developers and speculators.

By one estimate, 81 percent of these early black landowners didn’t make wills, largely due to a lack of access to legal resources. Their descendants then inherited the land without a clear title, and it thereby became designated as heirs’ property. Although heirs’ property exists in many regions of the country, it’s most prevalent in low-income communities. In the South, according to one estimate, more than 50 percent of heirs’-property owners are African-American, many of them the descendants of slaves and sharecroppers.

Without a clear title, heirs’-property owners are limited in what they can do with their land. They can’t get mortgages or do extensive repairs on their homes; as a consequence, some live in trailers. They aren’t eligible to apply for state or federal housing aid (such as funds provided by the Federal Emergency Management Agency) or for nearly any of the programs administered by the Department of Agriculture, including the crucial loans and conservation funding that keep many rural landowners afloat.

African Americans Have Lost Untold Acres of Land Over the Last Century

That is truly sad.

What do we do about it?

.

This is why we ask for reparations.

Ask in one hand, shit in the other, loser. Why don't you stop whining about how whitey ruined your life and owes you, and just try to stand on your own two feet for a change?

Loser.
Loser.
Loser.

Whites have never stood on their own two feet. STFU.

What a stupid reply. Neither myself nor my ancestors had slaves or anyone to do their work for them. What you said was proof positive of your racism. It is a lie. Insert black where you put white and you would call that racist.

 

[MizMolly]

This is why we ask for reparations.

To whom?

From whom?

I didn't do any of the shit that resulted in 81% of black folks losing their land. I didn't benefit from any such losses. I have no inheritance. I am a first generation college graduate from a dirt-poor white family.

Should I be the one to bear the burden of reparations for shit that I didn't do or benefit from?

THAT is the problem.

I would be in favor of granting federal lands to black folks as reparations. There is PLENTY of that and most of it goes unused. Would that help?

.

You and your family have benefited from racism. All that what I didn't do stuff is weak. You didn't put NA's on reservations but you pay them every year.

Everything whites today benefitted from, you did also.

 

[IM2]

Long after the only words the white racists think King ever spoke, he said these words:

"We're Coming To Get Our Check"



We blacks know what King was about. And we will not whitewash it to serve your need to lie to yourselves.

Does this mean you will be consistent and stop telling others about famous white people?

When I start using one sentence out of their lives to try making a disingenuous argument then it will be time for you to make that request.

 

[hadit]

Long after the only words the white racists think King ever spoke, he said these words:

"We're Coming To Get Our Check"



We blacks know what King was about. And we will not whitewash it to serve your need to lie to yourselves.

Does this mean you will be consistent and stop telling others about famous white people?

When I start using one sentence out of their lives to try making a disingenuous argument then it will be time for you to make that request.

Then don't use such a misleading thread title.

 

[IM2]

“Whenever any black person utters words that make white people adjust their collars, white people unfailingly respond with a variation of the phrase “but not all white people.” If they are bold enough, they might even challenge you with the Super Saiyan Caucasian preamble of all preambles: “What would Martin Luther King say about ...”

Michael Harriot​

MLK fought against white racism. When he made his famous speech in 1963, he was saying that he wanted his kids to live in a world without white racism where they could be seen for the content of their character by WHITES, not that he was talking about some fictional society that ignores racism. We need to understand that King opposed white racism. We need to understand that almost every word he spoke was in opposition to white racism. Because he spoke against the Vietnam war as well. We need to learn that he was asking whites to stop being racists and that whites start looking at blacks not for the color of their skin but that WHITES begin looking at us for the content of our character. He was not asking blacks to ignore white racism under the guise of some fake colorblind belief.

That was his dream. The end of white racism. But his life has been deconstruced by right wing racist whites to remake him into a mealy mouthed black conservative republican. When you discuss race in the various social media platforms or society in general, there is always somebody white who thinks they can tell you how what you say would not be approved by King because you are opposing white racism unapologetically and in no uncertain terms. King has been dead for over 50 years now and just like in almost ever other matter of race relations a certain part of the white community has amnesia about King.

I was 7 years old when King was murdered by a white man in 1968. Before his murder, King was organizing a poor peoples march again Washington. King felt at that time the government of the United States must begin to provide for the economic damage caused by the years of racism against blacks by the government of this country. He pledged that when he went to the White House this time, he was coming to get a check. It is very plain that King was moving in the direction of demanding economic equality and economic justice for blacks. Conservatives who hijack his words miss this reality. Unfortunately King did not make it to Washington. However, that goal of economic equality remains in effect for blacks today.

King was killed because the content of his character dictated that he was required to stand up and oppose injustice. Not that he sits idly by ignoring the whites practicing it so he would not be considered a racist.

 

[IM2]

Long after the only words the white racists think King ever spoke, he said these words:

"We're Coming To Get Our Check"



We blacks know what King was about. And we will not whitewash it to serve your need to lie to yourselves.

Does this mean you will be consistent and stop telling others about famous white people?

When I start using one sentence out of their lives to try making a disingenuous argument then it will be time for you to make that request.

Then don't use such a misleading thread title.

The title is not misleading. The attempts of whites like you to spin King into what he was not is.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

“Whenever any black person utters words that make white people adjust their collars, white people unfailingly respond with a variation of the phrase “but not all white people.” If they are bold enough, they might even challenge you with the Super Saiyan Caucasian preamble of all preambles: “What would Martin Luther King say about ...”

Michael Harriot​

MLK fought against white racism. When he made his famous speech in 1963, he was saying that he wanted his kids to live in a world without white racism where they could be seen for the content of their character by WHITES, not that he was talking about some fictional society that ignores racism. We need to understand that King opposed white racism. We need to understand that almost every word he spoke was in opposition to white racism. Because he spoke against the Vietnam war as well. We need to learn that he was asking whites to stop being racists and that whites start looking at blacks not for the color of their skin but that WHITES begin looking at us for the content of our character. He was not asking blacks to ignore white racism under the guise of some fake colorblind belief.

That was his dream. The end of white racism. But his life has been deconstruced by right wing racist whites to remake him into a mealy mouthed black conservative republican. When you discuss race in the various social media platforms or society in general, there is always somebody white who thinks they can tell you how what you say would not be approved by King because you are opposing white racism unapologetically and in no uncertain terms. King has been dead for over 50 years now and just like in almost ever other matter of race relations a certain part of the white community has amnesia about King.

I was 7 years old when King was murdered by a white man in 1968. Before his murder, King was organizing a poor peoples march again Washington. King felt at that time the government of the United States must begin to provide for the economic damage caused by the years of racism against blacks by the government of this country. He pledged that when he went to the White House this time, he was coming to get a check. It is very plain that King was moving in the direction of demanding economic equality and economic justice for blacks. Conservatives who hijack his words miss this reality. Unfortunately King did not make it to Washington. However, that goal of economic equality remains in effect for blacks today.

King was killed because the content of his character dictated that he was required to stand up and oppose injustice. Not that he sits idly by ignoring the whites practicing it so he would not be considered a racist.

Okay. Lots of generalities in there, but no specifics on what white racism is and what I need to do.

Obviously this is all my fault. Tell me what I need to do to fix it.