OPINION Video: Debunking The Most Common Myths White People Tell About Race

[MizMolly]

"Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo​

This lady is is an expert in the field. Why do people who have no clue, have not done the extensive work with individuals for 20 odd years every day across the lines of race to try to figure his out think they can just summarily dispute her because they have an opinion?

Yet on the other hand people will accept a dropout like Limbaugh and his unstudied and unresearched opinion as gospel. Hate to tell you white folks but you got problems. The major problem revolves around how you see other races. Until you can admit you have a problem work to fix it, America stays divided. Because the rest of us do not have to bow down and just accept your problem and live with it.

So let me see if I have this right. You know everything and white people know nothing. Your argument fails when you exhibit the same traits you are disparaging.

Apparently you have it wrong given the fact that the quote I posted was from a white person.

But you think white people are racist and lie

 

[MizMolly]

I absolutely believe in Manifest Destiny. Hope that doesn't offend you too much.

I believe we are PAYING for our sins because we've allowed the Turd Worlders into this country and too many have decided to treat these backward cultures as equals.

America has not yet began to pay for it's sins. But the time is coming,

Spoken like a political chump.

Yes that's what you are.

.


.

View attachment 221685
.

When did X say that?

Last week? During the Obama presidency?

Because if he spoke those words recently I'm damn sure going to listen because he rose from the dead to say it. Therefore he has some insight about the current democratic party that needs to be seriously considered.

This coming from someone who always brings up the past if white people. White ironic.

 

[Muhammed]

And you won't even demand reparations from the party of slavery? Because you're a political chump.

Why should anyone take you seriously, and not consider you to be a political chump, if you don't go after the party of slavery?

WTF?

There was no "party of slavery". Slavery was a social/economic institution that existed long before there were any political parties and long before there were even colonies here. And the African TransAtlantic type went on starting in the 16th century throughout the Atlantic side of the Americas, many more outside what would eventually become the US than inside it. Nor was a political party needed to own slaves, which were owned by Federalists, Democratic-Republicans, Whigs, Know Nothings, Democrats, Constitutional Unionists and even Ulysses Grant... and more to the point, by owners who had no political party at all.

Generally pre-1860 political parties either came out against slavery (e.g. Free Soil, Republicans) or they danced around the issue taking no position "pro" or "con", as did the Whigs, Know Nothings and Democrats. That failure to take a stand when it could no longer be ignored caused the Whigs to evaporate and the Democrats to finish fourth in the Presidential election of 1860 pulling no electoral votes at all out of the South, the same number (zero) as Lincoln who wasn't even on those states' ballots. The South had already kicked the Democratic convention out of its territory (South Carolina) specifically because it was not a 'party of slavery', which is what the South wanted. And the Confederacy, for its part, had no political parties.

But slavery was brought to the Americas not by political parties or politics but by commerce. Merchants in human cargo from Britain, Spain, France and Portugal, simply to make more money in labor-intensive land exploitations. And though most of those countries and their former colonies had by the time of the US Civil War abolished the practice, it still went on in a few places finally ending in Brazil in 1888 --- where "Democrats" have never existed.

Looks like you need a primer regarding which still existing political party supported slavery.



You party of slavery apologists are some immoral bastards.

And blacks who vote Democrat are political chumps.

Looks like you need you a edumacation on what "Prager U" is.

It's a radio blowhard talking head filling up YouTube with bullshit in five-minute plops. That's one of the more infamous ones replete with stretches, omissions, lies and just made-up crap from the toilet of an asshole (Dennis Prager by name) who can't be bothered to crack a history book so instead he pulls it out of his ass and hires some talking head to read his script. I've torn that very video apart many a time on this board and elsewhere.

Me, I don't have a "party". I don't believe in being a joiner. What I have is history books because I do believe in knowing where we got here from and I do believe in the ******* Truth.

Here's a novel idea --- next time you want to know history look in an actual history book rather than trotting off to the fantasy world of YouTube where anyone can post anything they like and it's never vetted by anybody except the comment section. Which you should read. That's what I did (over the years) in order to post that history you just hit "Reply" to. That's right, I pulled it out of my own experience rather than running off to hide behind some "fake U" echo chamber that would project what I wished to have been the past instead of what actually IS the past.

I left you all manner of facts and figures in that post. Feel free to get off your ass and break a book sweat to try to refute any of it.

Your logic fails because your entire argument is squarely based on a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem attack.

Bullshit. Ad hom would be if I attacked you for being retarded enough to post a video from "Prager U". That may be true but instead I exposed Propaganda U for the sham it is.

Once AGAIN I gave you a historical synopsis to which you offered no response. Hiding behind the skirts of a propagandist whose propaganda is easily and regularly debunked is not by any definition a response or rebuttal. Once AGAIN address what I posted directly and quit running away from it, or else just accept it as the historical fact it is.

You left out the part about Democrats supporting slavery and Republicans opposing slavery.

And BTW, calling Dennis Prager an asshole propagandist is indeed and ad hominem attack. Your logic fails again, party of slavery apologist.

 

[ABikerSailor]

12%? Sorry, I'm not sure where that number comes from. Did IM2 claim 88% of the country is racist or something?

Also, somewhere around 20-22% of the population elected Obama in each election he won.

Are you seriously claiming you dont know what the 12% means?

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

 

[ABikerSailor]

There was no "party of slavery". Slavery was a social/economic institution that existed long before there were any political parties and long before there were even colonies here. And the African TransAtlantic type went on starting in the 16th century throughout the Atlantic side of the Americas, many more outside what would eventually become the US than inside it. Nor was a political party needed to own slaves, which were owned by Federalists, Democratic-Republicans, Whigs, Know Nothings, Democrats, Constitutional Unionists and even Ulysses Grant... and more to the point, by owners who had no political party at all.

Generally pre-1860 political parties either came out against slavery (e.g. Free Soil, Republicans) or they danced around the issue taking no position "pro" or "con", as did the Whigs, Know Nothings and Democrats. That failure to take a stand when it could no longer be ignored caused the Whigs to evaporate and the Democrats to finish fourth in the Presidential election of 1860 pulling no electoral votes at all out of the South, the same number (zero) as Lincoln who wasn't even on those states' ballots. The South had already kicked the Democratic convention out of its territory (South Carolina) specifically because it was not a 'party of slavery', which is what the South wanted. And the Confederacy, for its part, had no political parties.

But slavery was brought to the Americas not by political parties or politics but by commerce. Merchants in human cargo from Britain, Spain, France and Portugal, simply to make more money in labor-intensive land exploitations. And though most of those countries and their former colonies had by the time of the US Civil War abolished the practice, it still went on in a few places finally ending in Brazil in 1888 --- where "Democrats" have never existed.

Looks like you need a primer regarding which still existing political party supported slavery.



You party of slavery apologists are some immoral bastards.

And blacks who vote Democrat are political chumps.

Looks like you need you a edumacation on what "Prager U" is.

It's a radio blowhard talking head filling up YouTube with bullshit in five-minute plops. That's one of the more infamous ones replete with stretches, omissions, lies and just made-up crap from the toilet of an asshole (Dennis Prager by name) who can't be bothered to crack a history book so instead he pulls it out of his ass and hires some talking head to read his script. I've torn that very video apart many a time on this board and elsewhere.

Me, I don't have a "party". I don't believe in being a joiner. What I have is history books because I do believe in knowing where we got here from and I do believe in the ******* Truth.

Here's a novel idea --- next time you want to know history look in an actual history book rather than trotting off to the fantasy world of YouTube where anyone can post anything they like and it's never vetted by anybody except the comment section. Which you should read. That's what I did (over the years) in order to post that history you just hit "Reply" to. That's right, I pulled it out of my own experience rather than running off to hide behind some "fake U" echo chamber that would project what I wished to have been the past instead of what actually IS the past.

I left you all manner of facts and figures in that post. Feel free to get off your ass and break a book sweat to try to refute any of it.

Your logic fails because your entire argument is squarely based on a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem attack.

Bullshit. Ad hom would be if I attacked you for being retarded enough to post a video from "Prager U". That may be true but instead I exposed Propaganda U for the sham it is.

Once AGAIN I gave you a historical synopsis to which you offered no response. Hiding behind the skirts of a propagandist whose propaganda is easily and regularly debunked is not by any definition a response or rebuttal. Once AGAIN address what I posted directly and quit running away from it, or else just accept it as the historical fact it is.

You left out the part about Democrats supporting slavery and Republicans opposing slavery.

And BTW, calling Dennis Prager an asshole propagandist is indeed and ad hominem attack. Your logic fails again, party of slavery apologist.

Yes, Lincoln was a Republican and he was instrumental in getting the slaves freed. However...................after the blacks were freed, Republicans in the South didn't want them voting in elections, so they came up with stuff like poll taxes and voter exams to make it almost impossible for a black man to vote.

Lots of resentment built up among black folks because of that.

Then? Along comes Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights movement. Lyndon Johnson saw what was going on, and decided that if he supported the Civil Rights movement, as well as gave black people a full vote without any poll taxes or voter exams, he could turn the black vote Democrat for a long time. He called it the Southern Strategy, and used it to flip the black vote for the Dems.

 

[IM2]

12%? Sorry, I'm not sure where that number comes from. Did IM2 claim 88% of the country is racist or something?

Also, somewhere around 20-22% of the population elected Obama in each election he won.

Are you seriously claiming you dont know what the 12% means?

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

"Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Are you seriously claiming you dont know what the 12% means?

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Are you seriously claiming you dont know what the 12% means?

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

"Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo

Is the T-shirt racist or not.

 

[IM2]

Looks like you need a primer regarding which still existing political party supported slavery.



You party of slavery apologists are some immoral bastards.

And blacks who vote Democrat are political chumps.

Looks like you need you a edumacation on what "Prager U" is.

It's a radio blowhard talking head filling up YouTube with bullshit in five-minute plops. That's one of the more infamous ones replete with stretches, omissions, lies and just made-up crap from the toilet of an asshole (Dennis Prager by name) who can't be bothered to crack a history book so instead he pulls it out of his ass and hires some talking head to read his script. I've torn that very video apart many a time on this board and elsewhere.

Me, I don't have a "party". I don't believe in being a joiner. What I have is history books because I do believe in knowing where we got here from and I do believe in the ******* Truth.

Here's a novel idea --- next time you want to know history look in an actual history book rather than trotting off to the fantasy world of YouTube where anyone can post anything they like and it's never vetted by anybody except the comment section. Which you should read. That's what I did (over the years) in order to post that history you just hit "Reply" to. That's right, I pulled it out of my own experience rather than running off to hide behind some "fake U" echo chamber that would project what I wished to have been the past instead of what actually IS the past.

I left you all manner of facts and figures in that post. Feel free to get off your ass and break a book sweat to try to refute any of it.

Your logic fails because your entire argument is squarely based on a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem attack.

Bullshit. Ad hom would be if I attacked you for being retarded enough to post a video from "Prager U". That may be true but instead I exposed Propaganda U for the sham it is.

Once AGAIN I gave you a historical synopsis to which you offered no response. Hiding behind the skirts of a propagandist whose propaganda is easily and regularly debunked is not by any definition a response or rebuttal. Once AGAIN address what I posted directly and quit running away from it, or else just accept it as the historical fact it is.

You left out the part about Democrats supporting slavery and Republicans opposing slavery.

And BTW, calling Dennis Prager an asshole propagandist is indeed and ad hominem attack. Your logic fails again, party of slavery apologist.

Yes, Lincoln was a Republican and he was instrumental in getting the slaves freed. However...................after the blacks were freed, Republicans in the South didn't want them voting in elections, so they came up with stuff like poll taxes and voter exams to make it almost impossible for a black man to vote.

Lots of resentment built up among black folks because of that.

Then? Along comes Martin Luther King Jr. and the Civil Rights movement. Lyndon Johnson saw what was going on, and decided that if he supported the Civil Rights movement, as well as gave black people a full vote without any poll taxes or voter exams, he could turn the black vote Democrat for a long time. He called it the Southern Strategy, and used it to flip the black vote for the Dems.

That was not the southern strategy.

 

[IM2]

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

Because it was racist. Whites don't get to tell us what is and is not racist.

 

[ABikerSailor]

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

Nope. That shirt itself isn't racist. It is saying that you disagree with Obama and think he's a cartoon president. Tell you the truth, even though I supported Obama, that is a fairly clever t-shirt.

Now, if you had a pic of Obama eating a banana and scratching the top of his head like a chimp, then that would be a racist t-shirt.

And yeah, some people have become so PC that simple commentary seems to elude them and they see anything against one of their heroes as racist.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

Because it was racist. Whites don't get to tell us what is and is not racist.

Thanks for proving my point.

 

[Pogo]

There was no "party of slavery". Slavery was a social/economic institution that existed long before there were any political parties and long before there were even colonies here. And the African TransAtlantic type went on starting in the 16th century throughout the Atlantic side of the Americas, many more outside what would eventually become the US than inside it. Nor was a political party needed to own slaves, which were owned by Federalists, Democratic-Republicans, Whigs, Know Nothings, Democrats, Constitutional Unionists and even Ulysses Grant... and more to the point, by owners who had no political party at all.

Generally pre-1860 political parties either came out against slavery (e.g. Free Soil, Republicans) or they danced around the issue taking no position "pro" or "con", as did the Whigs, Know Nothings and Democrats. That failure to take a stand when it could no longer be ignored caused the Whigs to evaporate and the Democrats to finish fourth in the Presidential election of 1860 pulling no electoral votes at all out of the South, the same number (zero) as Lincoln who wasn't even on those states' ballots. The South had already kicked the Democratic convention out of its territory (South Carolina) specifically because it was not a 'party of slavery', which is what the South wanted. And the Confederacy, for its part, had no political parties.

But slavery was brought to the Americas not by political parties or politics but by commerce. Merchants in human cargo from Britain, Spain, France and Portugal, simply to make more money in labor-intensive land exploitations. And though most of those countries and their former colonies had by the time of the US Civil War abolished the practice, it still went on in a few places finally ending in Brazil in 1888 --- where "Democrats" have never existed.

Looks like you need a primer regarding which still existing political party supported slavery.



You party of slavery apologists are some immoral bastards.

And blacks who vote Democrat are political chumps.

Looks like you need you a edumacation on what "Prager U" is.

It's a radio blowhard talking head filling up YouTube with bullshit in five-minute plops. That's one of the more infamous ones replete with stretches, omissions, lies and just made-up crap from the toilet of an asshole (Dennis Prager by name) who can't be bothered to crack a history book so instead he pulls it out of his ass and hires some talking head to read his script. I've torn that very video apart many a time on this board and elsewhere.

Me, I don't have a "party". I don't believe in being a joiner. What I have is history books because I do believe in knowing where we got here from and I do believe in the ******* Truth.

Here's a novel idea --- next time you want to know history look in an actual history book rather than trotting off to the fantasy world of YouTube where anyone can post anything they like and it's never vetted by anybody except the comment section. Which you should read. That's what I did (over the years) in order to post that history you just hit "Reply" to. That's right, I pulled it out of my own experience rather than running off to hide behind some "fake U" echo chamber that would project what I wished to have been the past instead of what actually IS the past.

I left you all manner of facts and figures in that post. Feel free to get off your ass and break a book sweat to try to refute any of it.

Your logic fails because your entire argument is squarely based on a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem attack.

Bullshit. Ad hom would be if I attacked you for being retarded enough to post a video from "Prager U". That may be true but instead I exposed Propaganda U for the sham it is.

Once AGAIN I gave you a historical synopsis to which you offered no response. Hiding behind the skirts of a propagandist whose propaganda is easily and regularly debunked is not by any definition a response or rebuttal. Once AGAIN address what I posted directly and quit running away from it, or else just accept it as the historical fact it is.

You left out the part about Democrats supporting slavery and Republicans opposing slavery.

And BTW, calling Dennis Prager an asshole propagandist is indeed and ad hominem attack. Your logic fails again, party of slavery apologist.

Dennis Prager isn't here. YOU are. I trashed Prager with a description of what he does, as a pattern. In other words I dismiss your source as complete bullshit and provably so.

And you STILL have yet to take on any of the points I laid out --- WITHOUT a propaganda video.

And further, "party of slavery apologist" is ad hom.

Back up to the first line --- although I already articulated this in the original post ---- Republicans opposed slavery at the time of their founding; that was their main point. Democrats however were all over the map, like most other parties who took no stand. That failure to take a stand either way is what destroyed the Whig Party and made the Know Nothings irrelevant; in the case of Democrats they came in dead last in a field of four in the 1860 election but eventually survived. If they had been some unified "party of slavery" it would have been impossible for Lincoln to name one as his running mate in the National Union Party in 1864 and all those "War Democrats" still in the Union --- the only country that still had Democrats --- could not have existed.

Among the bullshit claims in your PropaganaU video is "Democrats started the Civil War". Again, pretty hard to do since (a) it was EITHER the South (Confederacy)* seceding OR Lincoln sending troops, depending on which way one wants to frame it, that "started the Civil War" and neither one were "Democrats". Lincoln obviously was Republican, and (b) the Democrats had been kicked out of the South and expelled them from their convention, which had to be moved north, and then got shut out in the South when the election came up. And they would not even exist again in the South until well after that War was over.

Now generally if you start a war you hang around to take part in it. During the time the Confederacy existed, Democrats were in the Union. All of them.

*(And when we say "South" in this context we limit the term to an elite wealthy aristocracy that owned the vast majority of property and the economy including the slaves. That element by NO means had universal Southern support for the ideas of secession and/or war. The conflict of the Civil War was as much inside the South between its own economic classes as it was between South and North.)

The actual Democrat candidate just preceding that conflict, Sen. Stephen Douglas of Illinois, backed the 'states rights' position that each state including new ones should decide slavery for itself, which proved tenable to virtually no one as he finished dead last with a total of one-and-a-half states (Missouri and a split EV from New Jersey). The only major candidate to pull as few votes from the South as Douglas did (zero) was Lincoln, whose name wasn't even on the ballots, while Douglas' name was. And once the election was over Douglas then embarked on a speaking tour to try (unsuccessfully) to preserve the Union and avert secession, and when that failed, advised Lincoln on the best ways to fight the Confederates. Lincoln then, with the support of aforementioned War Democrats, prosecuted the war, appointing one of those Unionist Democrats to be his military governor of occupied Tennessee and then took him for a running mate when his re-election came up calling the combination the National Union Party.

That sound like "starting a war" to you?

This is where you end up when you purport to capsulize a 150-year history in five minutes, using a bullshit script that plops myth after myth after myth in single sentences. Because it's impossible to lay all this down in a single sentence of a five-minute historical fantasy. You can't even read this post in five minutes, let alone research it. Now go find a video to hide behind that refutes any of the above, in detail, and doesn't just plop one-off bullshit sentences that I can vaporize in a single post.

The irony in this case lies in the fact that, here's a propagandist purporting to lay down these claims of an "other" who's been exploiting black people, and to be the talking head to read his provably bullshit script he hires ------- a black woman. And, it has to be said, shame on her as well for allowing Prager to use her as his propaganda tool because Gullibles like you will swallow it hook line and sinker and never bother to vet what's in it --- just because she's black.

 

[IM2]

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

"Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo

Is the T-shirt racist or not.

This explains your problem so I will repeat it.

Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo

 

[IM2]

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

Because it was racist. Whites don't get to tell us what is and is not racist.

Thanks for proving my point.

You have no point to prove.

 

[ptbw forever]

Looks like you need a primer regarding which still existing political party supported slavery.



You party of slavery apologists are some immoral bastards.

And blacks who vote Democrat are political chumps.

Looks like you need you a edumacation on what "Prager U" is.

It's a radio blowhard talking head filling up YouTube with bullshit in five-minute plops. That's one of the more infamous ones replete with stretches, omissions, lies and just made-up crap from the toilet of an asshole (Dennis Prager by name) who can't be bothered to crack a history book so instead he pulls it out of his ass and hires some talking head to read his script. I've torn that very video apart many a time on this board and elsewhere.

Me, I don't have a "party". I don't believe in being a joiner. What I have is history books because I do believe in knowing where we got here from and I do believe in the ******* Truth.

Here's a novel idea --- next time you want to know history look in an actual history book rather than trotting off to the fantasy world of YouTube where anyone can post anything they like and it's never vetted by anybody except the comment section. Which you should read. That's what I did (over the years) in order to post that history you just hit "Reply" to. That's right, I pulled it out of my own experience rather than running off to hide behind some "fake U" echo chamber that would project what I wished to have been the past instead of what actually IS the past.

I left you all manner of facts and figures in that post. Feel free to get off your ass and break a book sweat to try to refute any of it.

Your logic fails because your entire argument is squarely based on a logical fallacy known as an ad hominem attack.

Bullshit. Ad hom would be if I attacked you for being retarded enough to post a video from "Prager U". That may be true but instead I exposed Propaganda U for the sham it is.

Once AGAIN I gave you a historical synopsis to which you offered no response. Hiding behind the skirts of a propagandist whose propaganda is easily and regularly debunked is not by any definition a response or rebuttal. Once AGAIN address what I posted directly and quit running away from it, or else just accept it as the historical fact it is.

You left out the part about Democrats supporting slavery and Republicans opposing slavery.

And BTW, calling Dennis Prager an asshole propagandist is indeed and ad hominem attack. Your logic fails again, party of slavery apologist.

Dennis Prager isn't here. YOU are. I trashed Prager with a description of what he does, as a pattern. In other words I dismiss your source as complete bullshit and provably so.

And you STILL have yet to take on any of the points I laid out --- WITHOUT a propaganda video.

And further, "party of slavery apologist" is ad hom.

Prager's and the Republican argument that Democrats are the real racists based on the past is no less insidious and no less a form of propaganda than the Democrat's claim that the changing demographics in this country doesn't affect who the racists are today.

Your debunking of that video is no more damning than my debunking of the left wing racial paradigm and "white privilege" as a whole.

 

[ptbw forever]

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

"Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo

Is the T-shirt racist or not.

This explains your problem so I will repeat it.

Because most whites have not been trained to think with complexity about racism, and because it benefits white dominance not to do so, we have a very limited understanding of it (Kumashiro, 2009; LaDuke, 2009). We are the least likely to see, comprehend, or be invested in validating people of color’s assertions of racism and being honest about their consequences (King, 1991). At the same time, because of white social, economic, and political power within a white dominant culture, whites are the group in the position to legitimize people of color’s assertions of racism.Being in this position engenders a form of racial arrogance, and in this racial arrogance, whites have little compunction about debating the knowledge of people who have thought deeply about race through research, study, peer-reviewed scholarship, deep and on-going critical self-reflection, interracial relationships, and lived experience (Chinnery, 2008). This expertise is often trivialized and countered with simplistic platitudes, such as “people just need to see each other as individuals” or “see each other as humans” or “take personal responsibility.”

White lack of racial humility often leads to declarations of disagreement when in fact the problem is that we do not understand. Whites generally feel free to dismiss informed perspectives rather than have the humility to acknowledge that they are unfamiliar, reflect on them further, seek more information, or sustain a dialogue (DiAngelo & Sensoy, 2009)."

Dr. Robin DiAngelo

I would love to personally instill some humility in that dumbass *****.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

Because it was racist. Whites don't get to tell us what is and is not racist.

Thanks for proving my point.

You have no point to prove.

I said blacks see racism where it doesnt exist.
The T-shirt isnt racist in the least yet you say it is.
Again....thanks for proving my point.

Maybe if you explained why it's racist?

 

[ptbw forever]

No, I don't see that shirt as racist. I see it more as a commentary on Obama's presidency. You were saying you thought he was a Mickey Mouse president.

Exactly!
Thats what I told the black family yet they were having none of it.
It was racist no matter what.

Because it was racist. Whites don't get to tell us what is and is not racist.

Thanks for proving my point.

You have no point to prove.

I said blacks see racism where it doesnt exist.
The T-shirt isnt racist in the least yet you say it is.
Again....thanks for proving my point.

Maybe if you explained why it's racist?

Black people also often ignore racism where it DOES exist when they are not subjected to it.

 

[Montrovant]

12%? Sorry, I'm not sure where that number comes from. Did IM2 claim 88% of the country is racist or something?

Also, somewhere around 20-22% of the population elected Obama in each election he won.

Are you seriously claiming you dont know what the 12% means?

At the time, no, it didn't occur to me. Now I'm guessing that it is supposed to be the percentage of the population that is black. I'm not sure how that answers my original question to you, though.

You fail at the obvious.

You continue to avoid answering the question. Is your argument that since there were whites who voted for Obama, racism is not an issue in the US?

Racism is way overblown in America.
Blacks see it even when it's not there.

I wore this T-shirt to a restaurant in Marble Falls Texas and a black family had a hissy fit and told the manager that it was racist and he wanted us kicked out.

Do you see the shirt as racist?

I'm not sure why that would be considered racist, unless there's some Mickey Mouse racism connection I'm unaware of. I mean, I think I've read that Disney himself may have been somewhat of a racist, but that would be a pretty big stretch.

I think racism is both overblown and underblown. Some people see racism anywhere. Some people refuse to see it anywhere.