Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Whites don’t talk about race anywhere near as much as blacks do.

The white's you're around don't but that's hardly "most" white people. And that's because generally it's only those white people who feel threatened by minorities who complain about them. For a long time in my working environment I was generally the only black person and even today, I've only had the pleasure of working with another African American female software engineer once that I can recall. And once with a male African American software engineer back in 2005. We're just not that well represented in mid to upper echelons of the computer technology field when it comes to writing code.

 

[Correll]

You keep going back to "they don't want black people to participate in their organizations".

That has not been true for several generations now.

You really need to face that.

If this is not true and hasn't been for generations then why are there people on this message board TODAY April 15th 2018 still complaining about things that black people participate in and cultivate for themselves such as Black History Month and Black Lives Matter, etc.?

Probably because of the inherent hypocrisy of previously white organizations being forcibly desegregated, often at great pain, while black organizations are celebrated.

You keep stating that this isn't happening but that simply is not true.

Here is Taz complaining about Black History Month and Black Music Awards
Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...mericans-say-yes.672971/page-34#post-19728682

See above.

Here is Taz making the statement that focusing on one race is "racist" while failing to realize that the definition of racism includes a belief that one's own race is superior to that of others.
Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...mericans-say-yes.672971/page-36#post-19729003


Taz has probably been called racist many times in the past for daring to even MENTION his own race, as something to put ANY focus on, at all.


ONce again, I would suspect that he is motivated by the hypocrisy of having different rules for different people, based on race.

Here is Taz comparing the terrorist organization the Ku Klux Klan to the Black Lives Matter organization which was born out of the distress due to the disproportionate amount of black men dying at the hands of law enforcement
Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

http://www.usmessageboard.com/threa...mericans-say-yes.672971/page-34#post-19728605


The Klan has been a pathetically weak joke for many decades now, while Black Lives Matters, has done a LOT more than just voice reasonable concern about police use of force.

Why is Taz so concerned with what black people are doing that doesn't concern non-blacks? Usually the pretext with individuals who play this angle is that some how, something that black people are doing is taking away from whites [edited] or poses some type of danger of threat to the rest of society [/edited]. This is the constant refrain we hear time and time again yet they somehow are never able to produce any evidence to support their claims other than isolated incidents of the nature that occur to everyone as opposed to systemic, legalized and repetitive patterns and practices which either have been written law or are the remnants of the effects of the close to a century of racially discriminatory legislation put into place for the betterment of whites and generally at the expense of blacks.

Black History Month, for one example, concerns whites.


We are constantly bombarded with it leading up to the month and during.


Our children are indoctrinated and tested on Black History.


It is a solid two months of celebrating of Black HIstory and Blacks.


Which is odd, because any attempt to do anything like that for Whites is completely Taboo.



Different rules for different folks, based no skin color.


That's a concern for everyone.

 

[Correll]

I did go back.

Taz discussed how blacks have won awards in various NOT black award programs and seemed to support that.

You keep going back to "they don't want black people to participate in their organizations".


That has not been true for several generations now.


You really need to face that.

No, you need to face the fact that what you say is just not so.

LOL! 5 blacks holding awards is supposed to mean something? Do you care to post the pictures of the number of whites who have received the same award?

Blacks participating.


Disproving the nonsense that they are not.



Or that whites don't want them too.

It proves nothing. Now try comparing that to the number of whites holding the same award then get back with mw.

Nice moving the goal posts. The claim was that whites did not want blacks to participate. That has been disproved.


Deal with it.

 

[Correll]

Black skin gets you 230 points of discrimination in ivy league admissions.

Did it ever occur to you that the best of Candidate Pool B far exceeds the worse of Candidate Pool A?

White people were denied promotion based on the color of their skin.

That is the result of AA and civil rights, as it is now practiced.

This is a very interesting case but it is not a case where "unqualified" black people took jobs from "qualified" white people. No black people were hired/promoted so no white people were displaced except for the 6 which were unable to qualify for promotion.

I'm starting to remember a little bit more about this case and there were issues with the exam that was used to qualify the firefighters for promotion - part was subjective while the other part was objective. Additionally if I recall correctly some of the white fire fighters had access to materials that appeared on the test so that they could specifically prepare for it which of course allows one to score higher, but I'll have to revisit this later.

There were no issues with the exam.


The black people were not promoted because the white people took action when their civil rights were violated.

The City did discriminate against the white people, because it wanted to promote black people, based on skin color, not merit.

Their stated reason was fear of being sued, under "Disparate Impact Theory".

Whites have never ad their civil rights violated, I have to laugh at the fake indignation of punk ass racist whites talking about somebody getting something based on skin color.

YOu utterly failed to address the example provided.

Which demonstrate that whites are discriminated against when AA and associated programs/laws/ect, are used to favor blacks.


That is the nature of discrimination. You discriminate in favor of some one at the expense of someone else.


Only a liar or a fool would claim to not understand that.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Except that you call all whites racist.

You don't even understand the definition of racism so how the hell can you accuse someone of something that you can't even define?

If you will recall the definition of racism/racist includes the belief that one's own race is superior and others inferior. The following is the very definition of racism and is an excerpt from the reason that the state of Texas stipulated for it's leaving of the Union.

So when IM2 talks about the 200+ years of white affirmative action which is a analogy, not to be taken literally, this is from where it stems and the damage inflicted by this beginning has never come close to being undone even with all of the laws that have been passed because racist being racist will always find a way around them

She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.

[snipped]​

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.​

 

[Correll]

Black skin gets you 230 points of discrimination in ivy league admissions.

Did it ever occur to you that the best of Candidate Pool B far exceeds the worse of Candidate Pool A?

White people were denied promotion based on the color of their skin.

That is the result of AA and civil rights, as it is now practiced.

This is a very interesting case but it is not a case where "unqualified" black people took jobs from "qualified" white people. No black people were hired/promoted so no white people were displaced except for the 6 which were unable to qualify for promotion.

I'm starting to remember a little bit more about this case and there were issues with the exam that was used to qualify the firefighters for promotion - part was subjective while the other part was objective. Additionally if I recall correctly some of the white fire fighters had access to materials that appeared on the test so that they could specifically prepare for it which of course allows one to score higher, but I'll have to revisit this later.

There were no issues with the exam.


The black people were not promoted because the white people took action when their civil rights were violated.

The City did discriminate against the white people, because it wanted to promote black people, based on skin color, not merit.

Their stated reason was fear of being sued, under "Disparate Impact Theory".

Whites have never ad their civil rights violated, I have to laugh at the fake indignation of punk ass racist whites talking about somebody getting something based on skin color.

Civil Rights like illegal search and seizure? Rights like freedom of speech? The right to bear arms?
**** you. Whites have been screwed out of these rights on a regular basis.
Do you even know the definition of a civil right?

He doesn't know the definition of proportions, he might not know the definition of a civil right.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Nice moving the goal posts. The claim was that whites did not want blacks to participate. That has been disproved.

You're confusing and conflating two different conversations. I was commenting on Taz whining about black people having their own organizations and events and then erroneously labeling the activities and organizations as racists. I then asked if certain white people did not want and would not allow black people access to their events then why do they then complain or even care when blacks go off and create their own (speaking of Taz and others making the same complaints).

No one has ever stated that black people haven't made inroads into previously all white occupations, educational institutions, events etc. or that white people haven't been forced, unhappily at times, to allow it due to segregation laws.

As for your comment that whites did not want blacks to participate, it was true in the past otherwise we wouldn't have needed forced desegregation and the myriad of anti-discrimination laws. And in some cases, with some people it's still true. Just because they're forced to comply with the law doesn't mean that's they've changed their minds or feelings or still don't want or welcome the participation of blacks into what had been exclusively their [white] world.

 

[Correll]

Nice moving the goal posts. The claim was that whites did not want blacks to participate. That has been disproved.

You're confusing and conflating two different conversations. I was commenting on Taz whining about black people having their own organizations and events and then erroneously labeling the activities and organizations as racists. I then asked if certain white people did not want and would not allow black people access to their events then why....

And right there is where you keep going wrong.


You are ignoring that white people, have at great pain, long ago opened up their events and awards and ect, to black people.


Other than the elderly, today's whites grew up when this was already normal to them.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Do you have a list of laws negatively directed against black Americans?

You've had more than 24 hours and you've posted nothing.

Black Codes
Black Codes (United States) - Wikipedia

Black Codes in the antebellum South heavily regulated the activities and behavior of blacks. North Carolina restricted slaves from leaving their plantation; if one tried to court (date) a woman on another property, he risked severe punishments at the hands of the patrollers or needed a pass in order to pursue this relationship.[8] In many southern states, particularly after the insurrection of 1831, free Blacks were prohibited from the basic constitutional rights to assemble in groups, bear arms, learn to read and write, exercise free speech, or testify against white people in Court.[9][10][11][12] After 1810, states made manumissions of slaves more difficult to obtain, often requiring an act of legislature for each case. This sharply reduced the incidence of planters freeing slaves.[12]
[article]​

List of Jim Crow Laws Listed By State
List of Jim Crow law examples by state - Wikipedia

a few examples

Alabama

• "It shall be unlawfully to conduct a restaurant or other place for the serving of food in the city, at which white and colored people are served in the same room, unless such white and colored persons are effectually separated by a solid partition extending from the floor upward to a distance of seven feet or higher, and unless a separate entrance from the street is provided for each compartment."

Arizona
1864: Miscegenation [Statute] Marriages between whites with "Negroes, Indians, Mongolians" were declared illegal and void. The word "Descendants" does not appear in the statute.

California
An 1850 California statute provided that “no black, mulatto person, or Indian, shall be allowed to give evidence in favor of, or against a white man.” In 1854, the Supreme Court of California held that the statute precluded persons of Chinese descent from testifying for or against a white man. “It can hardly be supposed that any Legislature would . . exclud[e] domestic negroes and Indians, . . . and turn loose upon the community the more degraded tribes of the same species, who have nothing in common with us.”[5]

California's constitution stated that "no native of China" shall ever exercise the privileges of an elector in the state." Similar provisions appeared in the constitutions of Oregon and Idaho.
​

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You are ignoring that white people, have at great pain, long ago opened up their events and awards and ect, to black people.

Why do you believe that I have no knowledge or appreciation of what whites have done to help advance civil rights in this country?

 

[Correll]

You are ignoring that white people, have at great pain, long ago opened up their events and awards and ect, to black people.

Why do you believe that I have no knowledge or appreciation of what whites have done to help advance civil rights in this country?

Because of the way you keep talking as though it has not happened and is not the case, currently.

 

[BasicHumanUnit]

What makes you think I'm unhappy?

Was John Daniels your grandfather ?

 

[mudwhistle]

Civil Rights like illegal search and seizure? Rights like freedom of speech? The right to bear arms?
**** you. Whites have been screwed out of these rights on a regular basis.
Do you even know the definition of a civil right?

Why don't you educate us?

You must be one of those folks that thinks Civil Rights only apply to blacks.

 

[Taz]

Except that you call all whites racist.

You don't even understand the definition of racism so how the hell can you accuse someone of something that you can't even define?

If you will recall the definition of racism/racist includes the belief that one's own race is superior and others inferior. The following is the very definition of racism and is an excerpt from the reason that the state of Texas stipulated for it's leaving of the Union.

So when IM2 talks about the 200+ years of white affirmative action which is a analogy, not to be taken literally, this is from where it stems and the damage inflicted by this beginning has never come close to being undone even with all of the laws that have been passed because racist being racist will always find a way around them

She [the state of Texas] was received as a commonwealth holding, maintaining and protecting the institution known as negro slavery--the servitude of the African to the white race within her limits--a relation that had existed from the first settlement of her wilderness by the white race, and which her people intended should exist in all future time.

[snipped]​

We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the ***white *** race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an ***inferior*** and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.

That in this free government all ***white men*** are and of right ought to be entitled to equal civil and political rights; that the servitude of the African race, as existing in these States, is mutually beneficial to both bond and free, and is abundantly authorized and justified by the experience of mankind, and the revealed will of the Almighty Creator, as recognized by all Christian nations; while the destruction of the existing relations between the two races, as advocated by our sectional enemies, would bring inevitable calamities upon both and desolation upon the fifteen slave-holding states.​

IM2 explicitly calls all whites racists. Ask him to deny it. This should be fun.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

Probably because of the inherent hypocrisy of previously white organizations being forcibly desegregated, often at great pain, while black organizations are celebrated.

Our children are indoctrinated and tested on Black History.

Indoctrinated? Black history is American history, correct?

 

[Correll]

Probably because of the inherent hypocrisy of previously white organizations being forcibly desegregated, often at great pain, while black organizations are celebrated.

Our children are indoctrinated and tested on Black History.

Indoctrinated? Black history is American history, correct?

Not the way it is handled now.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

YOu utterly failed to address the example provided.

Which demonstrate that whites are discriminated against when AA and associated programs/laws/ect, are used to favor blacks.

That is the nature of discrimination. You discriminate in favor of some one at the expense of someone else.

Only a liar or a fool would claim to not understand that.

I'm neither a liar or a fool however I am self-taught so I don't get everything right (DISCLAIMER: I'm not an attorney).

The test was thrown out because the results were suspect, which is why I asked if you knew whether or not this was the first time they had utilized that particular testing method, I honestly don't remember and it's been at least 5 years or so since I've viewed the court documents.

Title VII includes both disparate treatment and disparate impact. Essentially the law says that you can't use a testing method that would have disparate impact on a certain segment of the population resulting in a discriminatory result which is why the agency was concerned with being sued - the fault was in their testing methodology unless you simply believe that all of the black and Hispanic candidates were simply less intelligent or less qualified.

I don't recall the final disposition of the case other than to go ahead and certify the original all white candidates who passed the test.

It seems like an option they could have utilized was a different kind of test but they for whatever reason didn't avail themselves of that option apparently.

Are you familiar with the Tuskegee Airmen? The Redtails? Do you think that when they were given flight slots as an all black unit that they displaced some white pilots?

 

[Correll]

YOu utterly failed to address the example provided.

Which demonstrate that whites are discriminated against when AA and associated programs/laws/ect, are used to favor blacks.

That is the nature of discrimination. You discriminate in favor of some one at the expense of someone else.

Only a liar or a fool would claim to not understand that.

I'm neither a liar or a fool however I am self-taught so I don't get everything right (DISCLAIMER: I'm not an attorney).

The test was thrown out because the results were suspect, which is why I asked if you knew whether or not this was the first time they had utilized that particular testing method, I honestly don't remember and it's been at least 5 years or so since I've viewed the court documents.

Title VII includes both disparate treatment and disparate impact. Essentially the law says that you can't use a testing method that would have disparate impact on a certain segment of the population resulting in a discriminatory result which is why the agency was concerned with being sued - the fault was in their testing methodology unless you simply believe that all of the black and Hispanic candidates were simply less intelligent or less qualified.

I don't recall the final disposition of the case other than to go ahead and certify the original all white candidates who passed the test.

It seems like an option they could have utilized was a different kind of test but they for whatever reason didn't avail themselves of that option apparently.

Are you familiar with the Tuskegee Airmen? The Redtails? Do you think that when they were given flight slots as an all black unit that they displaced some white pilots?

The Tuskegee Airmen were from WWII, over 60 years ago.


There was nothing wrong with the tests, other than the results were not what the city wanted, because of the skin color on those that did well.


Disparate Impact means that employers have to discriminate against whites, to assure an outcome with enough blacks in it, any time that the blacks in a certain workforce, fail to make it own their own.

As in New Haven.

 

[NewsVine_Mariyam]

You must be one of those folks that thinks Civil Rights only apply to blacks.

Well you obviously know nothing about me if you believe this to be true.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Let's see if NewsVine_Mariyam has the integrity to acknowledge that you proved him wrong.

I've addressed it here
Are Blacks More Racist Than Whites? Most Americans Say Yes

This document below appears to be a transcript of a hearing in which the exam administrated to the firefighters is being discussed. Are either of you familiar with Title VII or the concept of disparate impact? Or know whether or not this was the first time this test or a test of this type was used?
http://img.slate.com/media/1/123125/123087/2208015/2219585/Exhibit E.pdf

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act is government mandated institutional racism.

Whether one argues that it is for revenge or for giving the other side an advantage for awhile, the fact is that it is institutional racism promulgated by the federal government in direct violation of the 14th Amendment.

In my nearly 60 years on earth, there has never been more racism in America than there is now. Title VII has a great deal to do with that.