Do You Believe In Civil Rights?

[MarcATL]

I read his autobiography before it was cool to read it.

It was written as told to Darth Vader. I'm sure you get that joke.

I have a great deal of respect for Malcolm X. He showed real character. One of the toughest things for a man to do is admit when he is wrong, and Malcolm did that. More than once! That's what made him a great man.

And he paid the heaviest price for his integrity and honor.

It did cross my mind to mention Malcom. It really did. How could I not, considering your avatar?

Unfortunately, I think too many people in the black community follow the ideals of the old, radical Nation of Islam Malcolm and not the wizened Malcolm.

Also, I think if Malcolm had not been killed, he would have gone down the same marxist road as Andrew Young. So (and please don't take this the wrong way) his death was timely.

I believe you have a comprehensive, and mostly correct view of Brother Minister Malcolm X.

However, you must understand that I vehemently disagree with you assessment of his timely demise.

I think the black community suffers from his loss more than any other person.

As for the bolded, what makes you say that? I also vehemently disagree with that. Which other ethnicity is more forgiving than the black community? Name one.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

There is a world of difference. Because the "civil rights" as espoused by black movement leaders LEAVE out the broader issues in Civil Liberties. Including asset forfeiture, eminent domain, spying on citizens, etc. Have never HEARD the NAACP take those issues to the mat. Even THO --- the first 2 of those DIRECTLY affect the black communities disproportionately.

And you don't do "justice reform" just as a Civil rights issue for the benefit of one class. Just as you don't "fix" Fergusons by declaring the problem to be RACISM.. CLEARLY, the problems in Ferguson stem largely by failure of govt. NOT by racism..

Groups and organizations tend to address the issues and/or problems that affect them most. So perhaps your argument shouldn't be that there is a difference, but that they should also address those issues you brought to the fore. Yes?

Why are you running Mark?

Doc...MarcATL is not interested in actual discussion, but loves to appear like he is.
All he will do is bounce back rhetorical nonsense without ever addressing your points.
Your far better off ignoring him.

 

[9thIDdoc]

"Interesting. Your answer is part of the problem. I mean, I thank you for your honesty, however, how can anything be resolved when there's a segment of society, that believes there is no problem."

Or maybe you're determined to solve a problem that doesn't exist.

 

[JQPublic1]

I would not have allowed immigrants to qualify for Affirmative Action policies. Why? Because it pushed out the native born group it was designed to help.

I concur. After Affirmative Action was implemented every minority out there took advantage of it including White women who were underrepresented in higher education and in the job market. I think that originally AA was intended to facilitate the upward mobility of aspiring Blacks who were hampered by discrimination and White demagoguery. But due to wide spread animosity against helping Blacks, a more inclusive strategy emerged whereas any underrepresented group would qualify for AA. As White women and Asians jumped to the front of the line in educational pursuits, Blacks were still being held up by the opposition as the poster children of Affirmative Action.

The original thinking was that integration=social mobility. The middle and upper class blacks looked at the 45% of blacks still living in poverty and said.......so now what?

with all due respect I am obliged to question your premise that 45% of Blacks still live in poverty. The figure is closer to 27%.

This is where the Democrats attempting to portray themselves as leaders in maintaining civil rights fail.
U.S. Post Office Job Cuts Threaten Black Middle Class | The Huffington Post

This is ok because the Democrats approved. Maybe you can change IDs and run around yelling automation is the issue.

You will have to put this one in layman's terms. i am not sure what you are getting at here.

 

[Doc1]

There is a world of difference. Because the "civil rights" as espoused by black movement leaders LEAVE out the broader issues in Civil Liberties. Including asset forfeiture, eminent domain, spying on citizens, etc. Have never HEARD the NAACP take those issues to the mat. Even THO --- the first 2 of those DIRECTLY affect the black communities disproportionately.

And you don't do "justice reform" just as a Civil rights issue for the benefit of one class. Just as you don't "fix" Fergusons by declaring the problem to be RACISM.. CLEARLY, the problems in Ferguson stem largely by failure of govt. NOT by racism..

Groups and organizations tend to address the issues and/or problems that affect them most. So perhaps your argument shouldn't be that there is a difference, but that they should also address those issues you brought to the fore. Yes?

Why are you running Mark?

Doc...MarcATL is not interested in actual discussion, but loves to appear like he does.
All he will do is bounce back rhetorical nonsense without ever addressing your points.
Your far better off ignoring him.

So he is just one more internet coward, thanks

Indeed. I fell for his clap-trap more than once way back. He is a die-hard denier and can only see one side of a topic/subject and will completely disregard your input if it doesn't agree with his preconceived idea.

So he pretends to be an intellectual but is really just jerking himself off.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Groups and organizations tend to address the issues and/or problems that affect them most. So perhaps your argument shouldn't be that there is a difference, but that they should also address those issues you brought to the fore. Yes?

Why are you running Mark?

Doc...MarcATL is not interested in actual discussion, but loves to appear like he does.
All he will do is bounce back rhetorical nonsense without ever addressing your points.
Your far better off ignoring him.

So he is just one more internet coward, thanks

Indeed. I fell for his clap-trap more than once way back. He is a die-hard denier and can only see one side of a topic/subject and will completely disregard your input if it doesn't agree with his preconceived idea.

So he pretends to be an intellectual but is really just jerking himself off.

Bingo. But worse really, he is smart...but his intelligence is marginalized by his idealism. Happens often unfortunately.

 

[flacaltenn]

There is a world of difference. Because the "civil rights" as espoused by black movement leaders LEAVE out the broader issues in Civil Liberties. Including asset forfeiture, eminent domain, spying on citizens, etc. Have never HEARD the NAACP take those issues to the mat. Even THO --- the first 2 of those DIRECTLY affect the black communities disproportionately.

And you don't do "justice reform" just as a Civil rights issue for the benefit of one class. Just as you don't "fix" Fergusons by declaring the problem to be RACISM.. CLEARLY, the problems in Ferguson stem largely by failure of govt. NOT by racism..

Groups and organizations tend to address the issues and/or problems that affect them most. So perhaps your argument shouldn't be that there is a difference, but that they should also address those issues you brought to the fore. Yes?

That's not productive if "civil rights" means different things to different groups. Civil Liberties apply to ALL. And if the causes of grievances are not truely racism -- all this is better addressed from a BROADER coalition of interests.

Lets look at asset forfeiture for instance. Entire black community in the Deep South is raided by BATF and DEA and FBI. Town is dirt poor and 99% black. COWS are confiscated without trial. Tractors, farms and money is confiscated without trial. Entire TOWN is ransacked because of alleged drug violations.. We could on about how urban black communities are targeting for eminent domain because they are a cheap target. But it's not PRIMARILY a race issue is it? Although when Sharpton or the NAACP picks this up -- they re-brand it as "environmental justice" with a DISTINCTIVE racial overtone. Not MY preferences bud. I'm on board with ALL of this. Not just the stuff YOU want to paint as racial or Civil Rights.

Are those previous examples a Civil Rights issue because of RACISM -- or is it a larger Civil Liberty issue? You made it sound that I was some kind of primadonna only caring about MY hide. But true Civil Libertarians are working these abuses for the benefit of EVERYONE. And a lot of credibility would be gained by "black causes" if they spent less falsely claiming that most of this abuses are racial --- and not universal crime, justice, and fairness issues.

 

[g5000]

I read his autobiography before it was cool to read it.

It was written as told to Darth Vader. I'm sure you get that joke.

I have a great deal of respect for Malcolm X. He showed real character. One of the toughest things for a man to do is admit when he is wrong, and Malcolm did that. More than once! That's what made him a great man.

And he paid the heaviest price for his integrity and honor.

It did cross my mind to mention Malcom. It really did. How could I not, considering your avatar?

Unfortunately, I think too many people in the black community follow the ideals of the old, radical Nation of Islam Malcolm and not the wizened Malcolm.

Also, I think if Malcolm had not been killed, he would have gone down the same marxist road as Andrew Young. So (and please don't take this the wrong way) his death was timely.

I believe you have a comprehensive, and mostly correct view of Brother Minister Malcolm X.

However, you must understand that I vehemently disagree with you assessment of his timely demise.

I think the black community suffers from his loss more than any other person.

As for the bolded, what makes you say that? I also vehemently disagree with that. Which other ethnicity is more forgiving than the black community? Name one.

I was afraid you would get upset at my "timely death" remark.

Toward the end of his life, Malcolm began to show marxist tendencies. I understand the times ( I lived in them), and I understand why people gravitate toward the opposite pole of their oppressors. Nevertheless, this was not a good development.

Being a VERY persuasive person, Malcolm would have led his flock in that direction.

As for the radical Nation of Islam thing, you can't tell me there isn't a widely held opinion in the black community that all white people are the devil.

This was one of Malcolm's admissions of being wrong for which I respect him. He grew to realize that simply was not true.

However, that is still believed by too many blacks.

And you have absolutely no argument from me that the black community is an incredibly forgiving community. Their patience, understanding, forgiveness, and resilience as a whole people is downright awe inspiring. I frequently marvel over this, because I know I would never be as accepting and forgiving as they.

 

[flacaltenn]

Do try NOT to get personal. It's serious topic. Respect it. Please..

 

[Divine Wind]

.....Because the "civil rights" as espoused by black movement leaders LEAVE out the broader issues in Civil Liberties. Including asset forfeiture, eminent domain, spying on citizens, etc. Have never HEARD the NAACP take those issues to the mat. Even THO --- the first 2 of those DIRECTLY affect the black communities disproportionately.

And you don't do "justice reform" just as a Civil rights issue for the benefit of one class. Just as you don't "fix" Fergusons by declaring the problem to be RACISM.. CLEARLY, the problems in Ferguson stem largely by failure of govt. NOT by racism..

Agreed about the broader issues of civil rights. Our rights are collectively being eroded, ostensibly for the "greater good", but how is kicking 50 families off their 100-year old farms/ranches in order to build a private business such as the Texas Motor Speedway and Doral hotel/golf course really for the greater good? Because it gives local government a bigger tax base? That ain't right, but that's exactly what happened under eminent domain here in Texas. Donald Trump supports such authoritarian use of eminent domain:

Trump: I'm Only For Eminent Domain When It's Used To Create Jobs
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump explained his views on eminent domain and said he only supports exercising it when job creation is involved.

In the case where he tried to use eminent domain to obtain a woman's house to expand his hotel in Atlantic City and was unsuccessful, Trump said in hindsight he is very thankful that the woman didn't give in because in the end it "saved him a fortune."

"Because I have a hotel, and in order to expand the hotel and add 2,000 rooms, I would have had to take her thing," Trump said about his attempt at eminent domain. "Now, the 2,000 rooms would have provided about 2,500 jobs, Ultimately offered a lot of money, she didn't take it, I didn't build the job. I didn't do it. Saved me a lot of money because Atlantic City, you know, I had the good sense to leave 7 years ago. I got very lucky. Yeah, I think that would have been a good eminent domain because you would have provided thousands of jobs. And this is a woman who couldn't have cared less about her house. All she wanted was money."

 

[Doc1]

Do try NOT to get personal. It's serious topic. Respect it. Please..

We are, perhaps you might urge Marc to answer the simple question of "What does he mean by Civil Rights".

 

[g5000]

Do try NOT to get personal. It's serious topic. Respect it. Please..

We are, perhaps you might urge Marc to answer the simple question of "What does he mean by Civil Rights".

I think if you don't know what "civil rights" means when a black person asks you, then the problem is with you, not him.

It probably gob smacks him that you even have to ask.

 

[Doc1]

Do try NOT to get personal. It's serious topic. Respect it. Please..

We are, perhaps you might urge Marc to answer the simple question of "What does he mean by Civil Rights".

I think if you don't know what "civil rights" means when a black person asks you, then the problem is with you, not him.

It probably gob smacks him that you even have to ask.

I think you have no point to make whatsoever.
He asks the question, then questions why we "always" think it has to do with "black people". You should pay more attention, you look bad here.
I repeat, MarcATL , define what you mean by "Civil Rights".

 

[Doc1]

Why do so many of you equate civil rights with "doing something that only benefits black people?"

g5000
Pay closer attention son.

 

[flacaltenn]

.....Because the "civil rights" as espoused by black movement leaders LEAVE out the broader issues in Civil Liberties. Including asset forfeiture, eminent domain, spying on citizens, etc. Have never HEARD the NAACP take those issues to the mat. Even THO --- the first 2 of those DIRECTLY affect the black communities disproportionately.

And you don't do "justice reform" just as a Civil rights issue for the benefit of one class. Just as you don't "fix" Fergusons by declaring the problem to be RACISM.. CLEARLY, the problems in Ferguson stem largely by failure of govt. NOT by racism..

Agreed about the broader issues of civil rights. Our rights are collectively being eroded, ostensibly for the "greater good", but how is kicking 50 families off their 100-year old farms/ranches in order to build a private business such as the Texas Motor Speedway and Doral hotel/golf course really for the greater good? Because it gives local government a bigger tax base? That ain't right, but that's exactly what happened under eminent domain here in Texas. Donald Trump supports such authoritarian use of eminent domain:

Trump: I'm Only For Eminent Domain When It's Used To Create Jobs
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump explained his views on eminent domain and said he only supports exercising it when job creation is involved.

In the case where he tried to use eminent domain to obtain a woman's house to expand his hotel in Atlantic City and was unsuccessful, Trump said in hindsight he is very thankful that the woman didn't give in because in the end it "saved him a fortune."

"Because I have a hotel, and in order to expand the hotel and add 2,000 rooms, I would have had to take her thing," Trump said about his attempt at eminent domain. "Now, the 2,000 rooms would have provided about 2,500 jobs, Ultimately offered a lot of money, she didn't take it, I didn't build the job. I didn't do it. Saved me a lot of money because Atlantic City, you know, I had the good sense to leave 7 years ago. I got very lucky. Yeah, I think that would have been a good eminent domain because you would have provided thousands of jobs. And this is a woman who couldn't have cared less about her house. All she wanted was money."

Same thing comes up the "enviromental justice" parts of civil rights struggles. Long-time black communities are targeted for industrial expansion. Bringing with it pollution and loss of business. BECAUSE these communities are easy targets for redevelopment of ALL KINDS --- it's represented as a racial issue. But again, a LOT of issues are MUCH MORE than "racial"...

 

[Kosh]

There is a world of difference. Because the "civil rights" as espoused by black movement leaders LEAVE out the broader issues in Civil Liberties. Including asset forfeiture, eminent domain, spying on citizens, etc. Have never HEARD the NAACP take those issues to the mat. Even THO --- the first 2 of those DIRECTLY affect the black communities disproportionately.

And you don't do "justice reform" just as a Civil rights issue for the benefit of one class. Just as you don't "fix" Fergusons by declaring the problem to be RACISM.. CLEARLY, the problems in Ferguson stem largely by failure of govt. NOT by racism..

Groups and organizations tend to address the issues and/or problems that affect them most. So perhaps your argument shouldn't be that there is a difference, but that they should also address those issues you brought to the fore. Yes?

That's not productive if "civil rights" means different things to different groups. Civil Liberties apply to ALL. And if the causes of grievances are not truely racism -- all this is better addressed from a BROADER coalition of interests.

Lets look at asset forfeiture for instance. Entire black community in the Deep South is raided by BATF and DEA and FBI. Town is dirt poor and 99% black. COWS are confiscated without trial. Tractors, farms and money is confiscated without trial. Entire TOWN is ransacked because of alleged drug violations.. We could on about how urban black communities are targeting for eminent domain because they are a cheap target. But it's not PRIMARILY a race issue is it? Although when Sharpton or the NAACP picks this up -- they re-brand it as "environmental justice" with a DISTINCTIVE racial overtone. Not MY preferences bud. I'm on board with ALL of this. Not just the stuff YOU want to paint as racial or Civil Rights.

Are those previous examples a Civil Rights issue because of RACISM -- or is it a larger Civil Liberty issue? You made it sound that I was some kind of primadonna only caring about MY hide. But true Civil Libertarians are working these abuses for the benefit of EVERYONE. And a lot of credibility would be gained by "black causes" if they spent less falsely claiming that most of this abuses are racial --- and not universal crime, justice, and fairness issues.

Well in order for the OP to understand they will have to let go of their far left religious dogma!

Also it is important to know that the OP cheers when cops die!

The OP does not understand civil rights as the civil rights of the cop in Ferguson were violated, Did the far left come to his aid? Did the ACLU come to his aid?

The officer did his job and now can not work in public again because of the far left demonizing him. I bet the OP is ok with that! Which proves they do not understand what civil rights are other than their hyper partisan programmed viewpoint!

Ferguson Report: Former Officer Won't Face Civil Rights Charges

The OP will run the racism narrative for as long as they are programmed to.

Federal Judge Dismisses Civil Rights Lawsuit Against Ferguson Police Officers

When one acts like a thug, they should expect to be treated like a thug.

A civil right is an enforceable right or privilege, which if interfered with by another gives rise to an action for injury.

 

[Kosh]

Why do so many of you equate civil rights with "doing something that only benefits black people?"

g5000
Pay closer attention son.

g5000 is a far left drone, they will never pay attention to reality!

 

[dblack]

Do try NOT to get personal. It's serious topic. Respect it. Please..

We are, perhaps you might urge Marc to answer the simple question of "What does he mean by Civil Rights".

I think if you don't know what "civil rights" means when a black person asks you, then the problem is with you, not him.

It probably gob smacks him that you even have to ask.

It's a legitimate question. Much of what people are after in the name of 'civil rights' has nothing to do with equal protection of the law.

 

[dblack]

Why do so many of you equate civil rights with "doing something that only benefits black people?"

g5000
Pay closer attention son.

g5000 is a far left drone, they will never pay attention to reality!

I never got that impression.

 

[g5000]

Why do so many of you equate civil rights with "doing something that only benefits black people?"

g5000
Pay closer attention son.

He's right. That's how a lot of people perceive civil rights.

"What? You gave him the same protections of the law as me? What makes him so SPECIAL?!?!"

If you think blacks are given special privileges, then talk about them. Engage!