Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

[TheProgressivePatriot]

There is a huge ideological difference on this topic. Among conservative Americans, 49% consider most blacks racist, and only 12% see most whites that way. Among liberal voters, 27% see most white Americans as racist, and 21% say the same about black Americans.

From a partisan perspective, 49% of Republicans see most black Americans as racist, along with 36% of unaffiliated adults and 29% of Democrats.

Lets think about this. Why would conservatives and Republicans be more likely to see blacks as racists. I have two theories. 1) They are projecting their own racist attitudes onto blacks, and 2) They are feeling the heat from blacks who are pushing back against actual racism that is perpetrated by conservatives and Republicans.

I would like to take this opportunity to comment on the pictures that are posted at the beginning of the OP which clearly reflect the bias of the OP> At the top there is a photo of Neo Nazis and Neo confederate white supremacists. Then there is a photo of black people and their supporters with signs about stopping police brutality, black lives matter, and peace. Nothing racist at all, yet the implication is that these juxtaposed images are somehow equal, or worse, show that blacks are more racist.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Absolutely no one has suggested "the past doesn't matter". What we HAVE suggested is that no one gets to claim perpetual victimhood for themselves based on wrongs done to people who died before he or she was even born.

So in your mind this discussion is only about reparations and has nothing at all to do with current violations of civil rights law?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Among black Americans, 31% think most blacks are racist, while 24% consider most whites racist and 15% view most Hispanics that way.

I have to wonder how that stat was teased out since the list of questions asked di not include one about the race of the respondent.

 

[IM2]

Now we can play games o we can recognize hat without those 1965 provisions we did not have the right to vote. These racists want to deny everything we say and instead of answering the question I posted to them which would show just how much more racist whites are, they want to argue about how our rights were not ever denied because according to them the 15th amendment gave us the right to vote therefore we had the right to vote. We as blacks all know that was not the case yet these whites still want to argue how we actually had such rights even as the bill itself was called the Voting Rights Act. Not one of these guys can explain to us, no matter how they try twisting and spinning, any instance where the white ability to vote was ever up for renewal and they cannot tell us when there was ever added constitutional amendment to make sure the right to vote was protected. But each and every one of these cowards want keep arguing about how our right to vote wasn't up for renewal in 2006. .

Correll has weaseled out of producing evidence that shows a national policy of anti white discrimination. Not one of them have been able to produce the necessary evidence that shows racism against people of color has ended. Not one time have any of these people produced any evidence of laws, polices or anything else enacted by blacks that deny whites opportunities. but we are accused of being racists and even at that, more racist than whites. It's time that stopped.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Are you still yammering on about the evils of decades ago as though they have current relevance?

Are black people being required to read and comprehend something NOW which they have no ability to accomplish? Is some state requiring a literacy test to vote of which I am unaware? No? Hmm, then I guess you're wasting time, arentcha?

And more to the point, does blithering about literacy tests way back when have ANY effect on whether or not IM2's claims that "black voting rights had to be renewed"?

LOL, everytime you say something it reminds me of the face of that snarling woman in the photo of the Little Rock Nine. I tried to post it here but for some reason the system won't let me. Maybe a link will work
1957: The Civil Rights Movement

 

[beagle9]

Someone should let this cat IM2 know that white students were victims of reverse racism when they were forced to go to the majority black schools during the civil rights movement or act that forced that to happen.

Many whites actually dropped out of school during the time period all due to not wanting to be subjected to the racism they were to face at these schools when forced to go there as students. They became pawns in a government experiment to then stop racism or to stop the separation of whites and blacks in all things government where government was in control.

This was one of the areas where whites made more sacrifices in the struggle, whether it was sacrificing their educations to keep from being abused or sticking it out because they actually believed that the experiment could work, and it did work as they also gave sacrifice in the situation to make sure that it did.

Whites and blacks suffered greatly during the period of transformation, and to suggest that no whites suffered is a testiment that some people are either liars or just ignorant as to the entire situation that took place back then.

Someone needs to let you know that I started school in 1966. The black school in our town was closed. No one white was forced to go to a black school here. We were forced to go to the formerly all white schools and endured racism from white kids, white parents, teachers and administrators. White kids got anger from blacks because of the way whites treaded blacks and from the open opposition whites had to their kids going to n word schools and how hey did not want their children exposed to n words. A lot of whites dropped out because they did not want to be around blacks. I say whites have not suffered because what was going on was the assurance if equality regardless of race which whites opposed. How anyone can say whites suffered because the country was trying to make things equal for all people is a wee bit much.

Well it shows just how one sided your history is, and yes white students who were taught by their parents to fear the blacks and black culture back then, may have been confused until they met black racist who confirmed their worst fears about them. Then they met those blacks who were willing to give the white kids a chance and vice-versa the same for the black kids who were forced to go to the white schools, and found those whites who were willing to give the black kids a chance aside from the resistance they may have endured as well.

In all of this, yes sacrifices were made on both sides, and yes there is going to always be people who don't like each other's culture or cultural habits, but that doesn't mean that American's can't get along in the public square as American's.

The black school in your area closed, so no whites were forced to go there, but if they would have been forced to go there, and they would have met you, then all I can say is "Lord help them"... That would have been the three words of the day in regards to them in that situation.

You might need to re asses what you have learned about history if you think I am one sided. Because your story is dishonest. You see I know what I experienced from whites all the way through the time I graduated from college. Had whites in our town been made to go to the .black school, we would have faced the same racism. Thy didn't want to do it, so they decided o close the school. That's how far the white racism went here. And what you don't want to tell us is that whites were bused to lack schools full of racist beliefs and when they expressed them they got taught lessons for ding so. .I'm sure that white kid bought up being taught how inferior and stupid blacks are accepted the black teachers authority, You don't want talk about that, whites were just discriminated against only because they were white accord to your story.

You actually have the audacity to think that a people bullied for their entire lives by whites are just all going to be nice and accepting of whites. .And the thing about your commentary is that you tell us how whites and blacks have sacrificed but only blacks should be grateful to whites. The title of this thread is are blacks more racist than whites. You guys claim we are based on nothing but anecdotal evidence. We have cited laws, policies, and documented historical fact showing a minimum 241 year consistent record of racial hatred by whites against black people.

Dishonest eh ? Can you prove I'm lying or are you just projecting again ?? I like how you think, and I mean THINK you got all the answers, but in fact you don't.

I was bussed to an all black school in the 60's, and I was sacrificed on the civil rights alter.

Don't tell me I'm lying, because you have no clue what I know about this kind of stuff.

I had a black friend who had a racist black brother, and he hated me because I was white at 11 years old. Now what kind of racist could I have been having his brother as my friend at 11 years old in life ? LOL

Don't tell me blacks can't be racist, because I know better than that, and don't tell me that black majority schools back then weren't hell holes for whites who were forced to go there because some were racist hell holes for whites. Now whether they (the blacks) are more racist these days than whites I really couldn't tell ya.

I'm going to call you a liar and that's because you are lying. I was alive in the 1960's. You want to run your mouth off about how you went a racist black school and how a black friends brother hated you only because you were white. This is a disingenuous story at best. Whites had been allowed to be racists by law until the md 1960's, but you think we all should ignore this read your post about your ass being a white victim of black racism. Why in the hell to you think blacks just might not like whites in the 1960's? In the 1960's whites were still killing, raping, and robbing blacks get away with those crimes, And f you think things were just only happening in the south, scrap that lie.

List of Jim Crow law examples by state
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia

This list alone shows whites are more racist. Blacshve dine nthng like his. Ever.

Jim Crow in the North

After World War II, northern states began passing civil rights laws that prohibited discrimination – in theory, at least – and protected voting rights, long before Congress passed similar laws in the 1960s.

Northerners have forgotten, however, how hard it was for blacks living above the Mason-Dixon Line to struggle to achieve rudimentary freedoms.

While the North has had no Selma march, no Birmingham church bombing, and no George Wallace pronouncement of “segregation now, segregation tomorrow and segregation forever,” virtually every northern city had its share of racial killings, cross burnings and white riots.

Jim Crow in the North

The North isn’t better than the South: The real history of modern racism and segregation above the Mason-Dixon line

To scholars, however, the North as a land of liberty has become a straw man. No reflective historian any longer believes it. Scholars have focused on the North’s dark side. They have shown slavery’s deep roots in New England and New York City. Histories of twentieth-century America reveal the North’s bloody record of racial violence, and its stunningly segregated landscape of affluent white suburbs and destitute brown cities. In recent works of history, the North and the South emerge as rough racial equivalents: the South had Mississippi; the North had the Boston busing crisis. If the progressive side of the North enters into these stories, it is depicted as a rhetorical mask that hides the reality of racism.

The North isn’t better than the South: The real history of modern...

I'm not fooled by gaslighting and I don't cry crocodile tears. Your story leaves out the truth and you purposefully do so. That makes what you say a lie. We have said blacks are not as racist as whts and the facts bear those out. 1500 whites in a Rasmussen poll doesn't give your fake beliefs credibility. You can come in here ganging up on people in your little white racist havens all you want but n the real world your shit s debunked as lunacy. I'm sure you ran into some angry blacks in the 1960s and it was because if the things whites did. Overt white racism is what you were the victim of. Overt and legalized white racism made blacks not like white people. But you'd rather avoid that truth and claim you were the victim of back racists instead. And that's a lie.

So in your mind black racism against innocent whites was and always will be justified because of the ole white racist past that has since been disjoined from the non-racist future ?? At what point will you let my white people go, and let them go on to live their lives free from your chains now being placed around their necks ?? See how that works ?

Two wrongs never make a right, now move on with your life and quit begging already.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

So in your mind black racism against innocent whites was and always will be justified because of the ole white racist past that has since been disjoined from the non-racist future ?

WHAT black racism?

 

[TheProgressivePatriot]

Overall, just 30% of all Americans now rate race relations in the United States as good or excellent. Fourteen percent (14%) describe them as poor. Twenty-nine percent (29%) think race relations are getting better, while 32% believe they are getting worse. Thirty-five percent (35%) feel they are staying about the same.

These figures reflect more pessimism than was found in April when 42% gave race relations positive marks and 39% said race relations were improving. However, the April number reflected all-time highs while the current numbers are more consistent with the general attitudes of recent years.

A few comments:

1) The answer to that question is likely to be about 90% subjective based on a few interactions with the opposite race and some news coverage about racially motivated incidents. No individual an know objectively- I do not know- the state of race relations overall.

2) There is no information about regional differences and intervening variable such as education or income of those responding. It is very likely that a middle class person from the North East who is educated -of either race-will perceive race relations very differently from a poor, undereducated person from the deep south. Therefor, these stats a pretty useless.

3) The question does not include anything that indicates what the measure of "improving race relations" is, leaving that to each respondent to interpret for themselves and leaving open the probability that people of different races interpret it differently.

 

[IM2]

If they did away with the provisions today, blacks would still have the right to vote. And even if certain state and local governments imposed literacy tests and the like, it would be pointless since, as far as I know, blacks are just as literate as whites anyway.

Would it be fair to give the same test that lawyers are required to pass in order to get into law school to the average person, white or black? It wasn't that black people were less literate than whites, although coming from a background where learning to read was prohibited and punishable with violence was certainly a disadvantage, it was that the blacks were being required to read and comprehend things that the average person of any race would not be able to accomplish while whites were given easy passages to read and comprehend if they were required to take the test at all.

This was an example of blatant discriminatory treatment in order to obtain a discriminatory result - preventing African Americans from being able to vote.

Are you still yammering on about the evils of decades ago as though they have current relevance?

Are black people being required to read and comprehend something NOW which they have no ability to accomplish? Is some state requiring a literacy test to vote of which I am unaware? No? Hmm, then I guess you're wasting time, arentcha?

And more to the point, does blithering about literacy tests way back when have ANY effect on whether or not IM2's claims that "black voting rights had to be renewed"?

These past events do have relevance to now. You ask that silly question in the second paragraph and that is a show of just how ignorant you really are. You don't have much education do you?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

If they did away with the provisions today, blacks would still have the right to vote. And even if certain state and local governments imposed literacy tests and the like, it would be pointless since, as far as I know, blacks are just as literate as whites anyway.

Would it be fair to give the same test that lawyers are required to pass in order to get into law school to the average person, white or black? It wasn't that black people were less literate than whites, although coming from a background where learning to read was prohibited and punishable with violence was certainly a disadvantage, it was that the blacks were being required to read and comprehend things that the average person of any race would not be able to accomplish while whites were given easy passages to read and comprehend if they were required to take the test at all.

This was an example of blatant discriminatory treatment in order to obtain a discriminatory result - preventing African Americans from being able to vote.

That blacks are just as literate as whites goes without saying today and perhaps even in 1965, but when the 15th Amendment was ratified in 1870, there were definitely fewer literate blacks than whites.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

And just as an aside, George Zimmerman is at it again:
Zimmerman allegedly stalked private eye working on Jay-Z's Trayvon doc

George Zimmerman, who was acquitted of murdering unarmed teenager Trayvon Martin, has been charged with stalking a private investigator working on a Jay-Z documentary about the case.

Over the course of nine days in December, Dennis Warren got 55 calls, 67 text messages, 36 voicemails and 27 emails from Zimmerman, according to court documents. Zimmerman allegedly also threatened to feed the investigator to an alligator, the court papers show.

Zimmerman, who's had several run-ins with law enforcement since the racially charged 2012 case that ignited protests, is scheduled to be arraigned on the single misdemeanor charge on May 30.

Warren declined to comment, but according to a probable cause affidavit from the Seminole County Sheriff's Office, he was hired by a production company working with Jay-Z to contact people about participating in a TV series titled "Rest in Power: The Trayvon Martin Story."​

 

[beagle9]

So in your mind black racism against innocent whites was and always will be justified because of the ole white racist past that has since been disjoined from the non-racist future ?

WHAT black racism?

It's called reverse racism for the lack of a better term or label. You think that (reverse racism) can't be pepetrated by blacks who have shown that they can be just as racist as the next man or woman can be ??

 

[IM2]

What I think we can do is stop lying about the impact of laws and policies made. Things did not just stop because a law was changed or a process was determined to be illegal, nor was the damage created erased. his is the ONLY issue where people are told how the past doesn't matter and it is no coincidence the offending group is the one pushing this claim.

This needs to be highlighted and stated again, thank you.

Really? You feel that untrue slurs on an entire group of people "need to be stated again"? Why, precisely? I'm still trying to figure out what possible purpose you think dishonesty can serve.

Absolutely no one has suggested "the past doesn't matter". What we HAVE suggested is that no one gets to claim perpetual victimhood for themselves based on wrongs done to people who died before he or she was even born.

There are many lessons to be learned from the human race's history of slavery, but "blacks are special victims forever" and "all white people for the rest of eternity are guilty" are not among them.

It is very dfficult to debate people who really don't have the information necessary to be debating. The lesson you don't seem to have learned is that slavery was not the only thing that was done and the racism whites practiced after slavery impacts our lives now. Then we have the matter of how whites continue being racists while lying about how it's not going on.

Professor Carol Anderson has accurately noted that white racism cannot just be described by acts of white racial violence. She states that white racism happens in the courts, the legislatures, through city councils and school boards. It’s not about a klan rally, it’s about the passing of laws and policies.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Now we can play games o we can recognize hat without those 1965 provisions we did not have the right to vote. These racists want to deny everything we say

Who are "these racists" you refer to?

and instead of answering the question I posted to them which would show just how much more racist whites are, they want to argue about how our rights were not ever denied because according to them the 15th amendment gave us the right to vote therefore we had the right to vote.

I for one already answered that question for you. Now answer one for me: If blacks did not have the legal right to vote (15th Amendment) then why did the racists bother coming up with literacy tests? If blacks did not have the legal right to vote the racists could have just simply said "Get outta here. You don't have the right to vote."

That has been my point all along. The right was there on paper but some areas just came up with requirements they knew the blacks couldn't meet. And I'm sure there was intimidation and threats and such.
Simply put, Legally, blacks had the right to vote as per the 15th Amendment.

We as blacks all know that was not the case yet these whites still want to argue how we actually had such rights even as the bill itself was called the Voting Rights Act. Not one of these guys can explain to us, no matter how they try twisting and spinning, any instance where the white ability to vote was ever up for renewal and they cannot tell us when there was ever added constitutional amendment to make sure the right to vote was protected. But each and every one of these cowards want keep arguing about how our right to vote wasn't up for renewal in 2006. .

The right to vote WAS NOT RENEWED. The provisions were renewed. This is not a difference in semantics, it is simply the truth.

Correll has weaseled out of producing evidence that shows a national policy of anti white discrimination. Not one of them have been able to produce the necessary evidence that shows racism against people of color has ended. Not one time have any of these people produced any evidence of laws, polices or anything else enacted by blacks that deny whites opportunities. but we are accused of being racists and even at that, more racist than whites. It's time that stopped.

Enacting racist laws and policies are not required to be a racist. Ergo, some blacks are racist.

 

[beagle9]

What I think we can do is stop lying about the impact of laws and policies made. Things did not just stop because a law was changed or a process was determined to be illegal, nor was the damage created erased. his is the ONLY issue where people are told how the past doesn't matter and it is no coincidence the offending group is the one pushing this claim.

This needs to be highlighted and stated again, thank you.

Really? You feel that untrue slurs on an entire group of people "need to be stated again"? Why, precisely? I'm still trying to figure out what possible purpose you think dishonesty can serve.

Absolutely no one has suggested "the past doesn't matter". What we HAVE suggested is that no one gets to claim perpetual victimhood for themselves based on wrongs done to people who died before he or she was even born.

There are many lessons to be learned from the human race's history of slavery, but "blacks are special victims forever" and "all white people for the rest of eternity are guilty" are not among them.

It is very dfficult to debate people who really don't have the information necessary to be debating. The lesson you don't seem to have learned is that slavery was not the only thing that was done and the racism whites practiced after slavery impacts our lives now. Then we have the matter of how whites continue being racists while lying about how it's not going on.

Professor Carol Anderson has accurately noted that white racism cannot just be described by acts of white racial violence. She states that white racism happens in the courts, the legislatures, through city councils and school boards. It’s not about a klan rally, it’s about the passing of laws and policies.

What if it's a cultural dislike, and therefore it causes one culture to dislike things about another culture (not because of racism), and especially when it actually has absolutely nothing to do with ones skin color at all ??

Are people required to accept each other because of their color in life, and not be allowed to opt out if they don't like what they experience (and also) shouldn't people be allowed to choose those friends and family members who are more in tune with their values, characters, beliefs, and plan in life ??

 

[IM2]

So in your mind black racism against innocent whites was and always will be justified because of the ole white racist past that has since been disjoined from the non-racist future ?

WHAT black racism?

It's called reverse racism for the lack of a better term or label. You think that (reverse racism) can't be pepetrated by blacks who have shown that they can be just as racist as the next man or woman can be ??

There is no such thing as reverse racism.

7 reasons why reverse racism doesn’t exist

The state of race relations in the U.S., a country where people seem to be under the mistaken belief that we are “post-racial,” is dire. This week saw a young, unarmed black man killed by the NYPD in a stairwell, and a refusal to indict from a Ferguson grand jury. Responses to these events from those concerned about systemic discrimination against people of color also saw the revival of a familiar battle cry among my fellow honkies: “Reverse racism!”

Accusations of “reverse racism” are dragged out in many cases when people of color and nonwhite people speak out, sometimes passionately, about racial issues. In Texas, for example, a teacher was recently forced out of her job after a profanity-laced tweet from her private account, in which she referred to white people as “crackers.” Make no mistake: The district’s pressure wasn’t about the use of some four letter words. It was about “crackers,” and the belief that some people think it’s a racial slur. Yes, really. Recently, in another example, the “tanning tax” was called “racist against white people.”

#Breaking: Reverse racism doesn’t exist. Here’s why.

1) Racism = privilege + power
In order to be racist, you need to possess two traits. The first is privilege: A structural, institutional, and social advantage. White people occupy positions of racial privilege, even when they are disadvantaged in other ways. White women, for example, consistently make more than black women, because they benefit from racial attitudes. Furthermore, you also have to have power: the ability, backed up by society, to be a strong social influencer, with greater leeway when it comes to what you do, where, and how.

For instance, white people benefit from privilege and power when they aren’t arrested for drug crimes at disproportionate rates, while black people experience racism when they’re arrested, and sentenced, for the same crimes. This reflects a racialized power imbalance in the justice system. It’s about the privilege and power of white offenders (less likely to be racially profiled, more likely to have strong legal representation, more likely to be able to talk police officers out of an arrest) and the lack of social status for black offenders.

People of color talking about white people don’t occupy positions of privilege or power. Therefore, they cannot be racist. Racism is structural, not personal.

2) Anger is a legitimate response to oppression

When “reverse racism” is flung around, it’s often in response to angry language, to protests, to fights for equality. People of color have been pushing back on privilege and power for a long time. Many of them are understandably pretty tired of it. Unsurprisingly, some aren’t interested in moderating their tone for a white audience. That means that sometimes they use strong language, out of frustration, rage, or to make a heavy impact on observers. Still not reverse racism.

More importantly, insisting that people of color need to be nice about the way they talk about racism is, in fact, racist: It suggests that, for example, “angry black women” don’t merit social attention, because they’re being unreasonable.

7 reasons why reverse racism doesn't exist | The Daily Dot

Casual Reminder: There's No Such Thing As Reverse Racism
Casual Reminder: There's No Such Thing As Reverse Racism

Why there's no such thing as "Reverse Racism"

 

[IM2]

Now we can play games o we can recognize hat without those 1965 provisions we did not have the right to vote. These racists want to deny everything we say

Who are "these racists" you refer to?

and instead of answering the question I posted to them which would show just how much more racist whites are, they want to argue about how our rights were not ever denied because according to them the 15th amendment gave us the right to vote therefore we had the right to vote.

I for one already answered that question for you. Now answer one for me: If blacks did not have the legal right to vote (15th Amendment) then why did the racists bother coming up with literacy tests? If blacks did not have the legal right to vote the racists could have just simply said "Get outta here. You don't have the right to vote."

That has been my point all along. The right was there on paper but some areas just came up with requirements they knew the blacks couldn't meet. And I'm sure there was intimidation and threats and such.
Simply put, Legally, blacks had the right to vote as per the 15th Amendment.

We as blacks all know that was not the case yet these whites still want to argue how we actually had such rights even as the bill itself was called the Voting Rights Act. Not one of these guys can explain to us, no matter how they try twisting and spinning, any instance where the white ability to vote was ever up for renewal and they cannot tell us when there was ever added constitutional amendment to make sure the right to vote was protected. But each and every one of these cowards want keep arguing about how our right to vote wasn't up for renewal in 2006. .

The right to vote WAS NOT RENEWED. The provisions were renewed. This is not a difference in semantics, it is simply the truth.

Correll has weaseled out of producing evidence that shows a national policy of anti white discrimination. Not one of them have been able to produce the necessary evidence that shows racism against people of color has ended. Not one time have any of these people produced any evidence of laws, polices or anything else enacted by blacks that deny whites opportunities. but we are accused of being racists and even at that, more racist than whites. It's time that stopped.

Enacting racist laws and policies are not required to be a racist. Ergo, some blacks are racist.

Yes they are. Law and policies create the racism. The right to vote was up for renewal. That's what I said and it's what I will continue to say. The statement was made that blacks are more racist than whites so to the extent blacks have not taken racism to the level of enacting laws and policies denying whites of anything then we cannot be more racist than whites.

Now your question. You would rather ask a silly question than recognize this is how the black right to vote was denied therefore it did not exist.

 

[MizMolly]

Now we can play games o we can recognize hat without those 1965 provisions we did not have the right to vote. These racists want to deny everything we say

Who are "these racists" you refer to?

and instead of answering the question I posted to them which would show just how much more racist whites are, they want to argue about how our rights were not ever denied because according to them the 15th amendment gave us the right to vote therefore we had the right to vote.

I for one already answered that question for you. Now answer one for me: If blacks did not have the legal right to vote (15th Amendment) then why did the racists bother coming up with literacy tests? If blacks did not have the legal right to vote the racists could have just simply said "Get outta here. You don't have the right to vote."

That has been my point all along. The right was there on paper but some areas just came up with requirements they knew the blacks couldn't meet. And I'm sure there was intimidation and threats and such.
Simply put, Legally, blacks had the right to vote as per the 15th Amendment.

We as blacks all know that was not the case yet these whites still want to argue how we actually had such rights even as the bill itself was called the Voting Rights Act. Not one of these guys can explain to us, no matter how they try twisting and spinning, any instance where the white ability to vote was ever up for renewal and they cannot tell us when there was ever added constitutional amendment to make sure the right to vote was protected. But each and every one of these cowards want keep arguing about how our right to vote wasn't up for renewal in 2006. .

The right to vote WAS NOT RENEWED. The provisions were renewed. This is not a difference in semantics, it is simply the truth.

Correll has weaseled out of producing evidence that shows a national policy of anti white discrimination. Not one of them have been able to produce the necessary evidence that shows racism against people of color has ended. Not one time have any of these people produced any evidence of laws, polices or anything else enacted by blacks that deny whites opportunities. but we are accused of being racists and even at that, more racist than whites. It's time that stopped.

Enacting racist laws and policies are not required to be a racist. Ergo, some blacks are racist.

Yes they are. Law and policies create the racism. The right to vote was up for enwall. That's what I said and it's what I will continue to say. The statement was made that blacks are more racist than whites so to the extent blacks have not taken racism to the level of enacting laws and policies denying whites of anything then we cannot be more racist than whites.

You have no laws now denying you any less rights than whites.

 

[Dr Grump]

[
Why is it whites keep repeating this? Whites reinforced thier racism with law and policy and have built a system on it whereby they control the resources in that system. Calling a white person a name is not the same thing.

Racism is racism is racism. There are not different rules for different ethnicities. If you base you decisions on somebody's race then you are racist. Doesn't matter if you are white, black, Korean or whatever. Personally? I find Indians and Japanese people very racist.

 

[IM2]

Why 'Reverse Discrimination' Isn't Real

If there's one thing I can't stand about Internet discourse on social justice issues, it's that people who are completely unaware of the context of the world in which they live are allowed to have opinions about said world.

Certain conservative media outlets and ignorant masses have deemed the alleged murder of nine black people in the historically black South Carolina church by a 21-year-old white male as not a black-and-white problem or a race problem but as a "people problem."

The problem with crying reverse discrimination

We don't exist in a vacuum in which all groups have equal power. Within every system -- from racism to sexism to classism to body-shaming to heteronormativity to religion and everything in between -- there's a privileged group and there's a disadvantaged group, with the former having all the power and the latter having none of it.

Discrimination is not about getting your feelings hurt. Discrimination is about being treated unfairly in every aspect of your life, every single day of your life.

Which is why reverse discrimination isn't real, ever.

Why 'Reverse Discrimination' Isn't Real