The State of the Black Union

[Publius1787]

Thanks for biting. These are students that were already at risk and booted from public schools. The schools plights are due to the school district suddenly having issue with the curriculum and not passing on money for the school. The school is at war with the district attempting to take control to change the curriculum. Why would they do that when its proven that an Afrocentric pedagogy works?

Here is a example of one in Toronto. This was also a success but there is opposition to opening one for high school.

Toronto approves 2nd Africentric school - Toronto - CBC News

Here are some in Detroit. I am 100% behind this as the curriculum is exactly what I used with my children and they all are at the top of their classes.

Detroit Students Excel At Afro-Centric Schools While Public Schools Struggle | News One

If only we'd name all of our schools after an Afrocentric black nationalist communists, the world would be a better place. Oh how the teachings of Marcus Garvey could inspire us all.

Just shows the intentional desire to try and blame Black culture for everything instead of looking at what is taught in our schools. Most Black children know its BS and ommission of facts. When we take care of educating our own about their history then we have good results. This movement is only a few years old. Combined with the home schooling Black parents are also looking at in areas without these school the future looks bright indeed.

Blacks naming a school after Marcus Garvey would be like whites naming a School after Joseph Stalin. The same goes for W.E.B Dubois and Paul Robeson. All admired Stalin and thought communism was the way forward for negro improvement. Each of them inspired African countries to seek a Sovietesque model at the Pan African Congress. All of them were communists. All of them praised the Soviet Union and trashed the United States despite knowing perfectly well that the Soviets were killing innocent people in multiples of that of Nazi Germany. Indeed, when faced with Jim Crow they advocated not for freedom, but for enslavement of all races. What a great inspiration for black culture.

 

[Asclepias]

If only we'd name all of our schools after an Afrocentric black nationalist communists, the world would be a better place. Oh how the teachings of Marcus Garvey could inspire us all.

Just shows the intentional desire to try and blame Black culture for everything instead of looking at what is taught in our schools. Most Black children know its BS and ommission of facts. When we take care of educating our own about their history then we have good results. This movement is only a few years old. Combined with the home schooling Black parents are also looking at in areas without these school the future looks bright indeed.

Blacks naming a school after Marcus Garvey would be like whites naming a School after Joseph Stalin. The same goes for W.E.B Dubois and Paul Robeson. All admired Stalin and thought communism was the way forward for negro improvement. Each of them inspired African countries to seek a Sovietesque model at the Pan African Congress. All of them were communists. All of them praised the Soviet Union and trashed the United States despite knowing perfectly well that the Soviets were killing innocent people in multiples of that of Nazi Germany. Indeed, when faced with Jim Crow they advocated not for freedom, but for enslavement of all races. What a great inspiration for black culture.

If you can name schools after Washington and Jefferson etc who owned slaves and whiffed on the chance to free them, then we can name schools after Marcus Garvey. Stop whining about who our heroes are and look at yours. Cecil Rhodes was a genocidal serial killer and they have a scholarship named after him. What a great inspiration for white culture.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SIINVfqnxw"]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SIINVfqnxw[/ame]

 

[Publius1787]

Just shows the intentional desire to try and blame Black culture for everything instead of looking at what is taught in our schools. Most Black children know its BS and ommission of facts. When we take care of educating our own about their history then we have good results. This movement is only a few years old. Combined with the home schooling Black parents are also looking at in areas without these school the future looks bright indeed.

Blacks naming a school after Marcus Garvey would be like whites naming a School after Joseph Stalin. The same goes for W.E.B Dubois and Paul Robeson. All admired Stalin and thought communism was the way forward for negro improvement. Each of them inspired African countries to seek a Sovietesque model at the Pan African Congress. All of them were communists. All of them praised the Soviet Union and trashed the United States despite knowing perfectly well that the Soviets were killing innocent people in multiples of that of Nazi Germany. Indeed, when faced with Jim Crow they advocated not for freedom, but for enslavement of all races. What a great inspiration for black culture.

If you can name schools after Washington and Jefferson etc who owned slaves and whiffed on the chance to free them, then we can name schools after Marcus Garvey. Stop whining about who our heroes are and look at yours. Cecil Rhodes was a genocidal serial killer and they have a scholarship named after him. What a great inspiration for white culture.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SIINVfqnxw]White Privilege, Racism, White Denial & The Cost of Inequality - YouTube[/ame]

So your argument falls on this: It is ok to justify a wrong for a perceived wrong? Of course, I never said it was wrong to name the schools after those Afrocentric black nationalist Stalinists (AND YES THEY WERE STALINISTS), I just thought it was counterintuitive for the advancement they wish to achieve.

Jefferson was in debt so his slaves belonged to the bank and Washington married into money so those slaves belonged to his wife.

And here it is. You give me Tim Wise. I have been waiting for the longest time to get your take on white privilege. Of course, if Tim Wise believed half of the stuff he was spewing he would live in a multicultural neighborhood. He does not. He lives in an almost exclusively white neighborhood and makes his money as a white race peddler. I have read his books and I have already seen his lectures.

Tim Wise has found race peddling so profitable that he never bothered to attain a graduate degree and he is affiliated with STORM (STANDING TOGETHER TO ORGANIZE A REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT), COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR DEMOCRACY AND SOCIALISM, And Z Magazine.

Of course, if "white privilege" is such a barrier on black advancement then why in hell do the Asians out perform every demographic in the United States? And there it is, "white privilege" philosophy is dismantled in one sentence.

TIM WISE Tim Wise - Discover the Networks

•Self-described “antiracist essayist”
•Views the United States as a nation rife with white racism
•Lectures across the United States about the need to “combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.”

Tim Wise is a self-described “antiracist essayist” whose career is devoted to condemning the “white racism” and “white privilege” which, in his view, infest America. He also serves as a Board of Advisors member for Grassroots International.

Wise was born in Nashville, Tennessee in October 1968. He attended Tulane University, where he served as a leader of the campus’ anti-apartheid movement, pressuring the school to divest its assets from U.S. companies that conducted any business with the South African government. When Tulane failed to comply, Wise in 1988 persuaded Archbishop Desmond Tutu to turn down an honorary degree which the university was planning to award him. Wise graduated in 1990 with a B.A. in Political Science and a minor in Latin American Studies.

In the early 1990s, Wise received training as an antiracist activist from the New Orleans-based People's Institute for Survival and Beyond (PISB). Challenging its trainees “to analyze the structures of power and privilege that hinder social equity,” PISB contends that racism “is the single most critical barrier to building effective coalitions for social change.”

Wise’s first job in the field came as the youth coordinator for the Louisiana Coalition Against Racism and Nazism, which was originally founded to help defeat the political ambitions of Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, David Duke. From 1999 to 2003, Wise served as an advisor to the Fisk University Race Relations Institute.

In January 2002, Wise endorsed War Times, an anti-Iraq War newspaper produced by a group of San Francisco leftists, most of whom were affiliated with the radical organizations STORM and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). At a CCDS national convention six months later, Wise spoke on the topic os "Racism in the Present Era."

Though he held no graduate degree of any kind, in 2005 Wise served as an adjunct faculty member at the Smith College School for Social Work, where he co-taught a Master's-level class on racism in the United States.

Wise is the founder and director of the Association for White Anti-Racist Education (AWARE). Based in Brentwood, Tennessee, AWARE’s mission is “to educate white Americans about ongoing institutional racism in society; to raise awareness among whites to the harmful effects racism has on people of color and themselves; and to provide the tools for whites to support equity and justice.”

Wise has parlayed his racial angst into a speaking career that has included stops at more than 350 college campuses across the United States, where he lectures about the need to “combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.” Viewing America as a nation overrun by white racists ever-eager to ambush blacks and other minorities, Wise defines the American experience as an exercise in white privilege which can be countered only by an enlightened vanguard of antiracist whites such as himself.

Regularly posting his columns and opinion pieces on Z-Mag, Wise claims that the ever-increasing prosperity of the black middle class since the 1980s is essentially a meaningless statistical trick, and that blacks should receive preferential treatment in employment and academia.

Wise charges that U.S. troops in Iraq are in violation of Article 54 of the Geneva Convention, by which “t is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,” such as food, water, or livestock.

Wise has made evident his rabid anti-Catholicism, manifest in sardonic criticisms of the pope, of the Church’s position on abortion, and of the pedophilia scandal that rocked the Church.

Wise has compared America’s founding fathers to the Mujahadeen of Afghanistan

Wise is an incessant critic of Israel, which he views as a racist colonizer of Palestine; he alleges that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons should be considered no more acceptable than the potential acquisition of such an arsenal by the mullahs of Iran.

Wise loathes capitalism; he finds the U.S. prison system racist; he urges a complete overhaul of the criminal-justice system; and he advocates reparations not only to the descendants of slaves, but to all “people of color.”

Preceding the 2004 presidential election, Wise was a signatory to “Bush Can Be Stopped: A Letter to the Left,” which aimed to prevent the re-election of George W. Bush. The letter also appealed for public support for such organizations as MoveOn, U.S. Labor Against War, United for Peace and Justice, and Win Without War. Wise's fellow signers included Leslie Cagan, Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis, Carl Davidson, Ossie Davis, Ruby Dee, Manning Marable, Robert Meeropol, Michael Ratner, and Pete Seeger.

Wise characterized the American government’s allegedly slow response to Hurricane Katrina, which devastated the heavily black city of New Orleans in 2005, as follows:

“...n the wake of Hurricane Katrina, government at all levels and across party lines has engaged in ethnic cleansing in New Orleans, failing to provide rental assistance to the mostly black tenant base for over a year, plotting to tear down 5,000 perfectly usable units of public housing, failing to restart the city's public health care infrastructure, and even ordering the Red Cross not to provide relief in the first few days after the city flooded in September 2005, so as to force evacuation and empty out the city …”

In 2008, Wise maintained that the nomination of Senator Barack Obama as the Democrat presidential candidate could not be interpreted as evidence that America had become a land of opportunity for blacks as well as whites. Rather, pointing to the fact that Obama had largely avoided focusing on race-related issues in his campaign, Wise concluded that racism was in fact more prevalent than ever. In a March 2008 essay titled “Uh-Obama: Racism, White Voters and the Myth of Color-Blindness,” Wise wrote:

“Surely, that Obama is constrained in his ability to focus any real attention on these matters, suggests that whatever his success may say about America and race, one thing it utterly fails to say is that we have conquered the racial demons that have so long bedeviled us. And to the extent he must remain relatively silent about these issues, lest he find his political ascent headed in a decidedly different direction, it is true, however ironic, that his success actually confirms the salience of white power. If, in order to be elected, a man of color has to pander to white folks, in ways that no white politician would ever have to do to people who were black or brown, then white privilege and white power remain operative realities ... His success, far from disproving white power and privilege, confirms it with a vengeance.”

In an October 11, 2008 blog entry, Wise warned that an age of fascism would arise if Republican candidate John McCain were to be elected President in the upcoming election. Wrote Wise:

“If fascism comes, it will spring from the soil of middle America, from people known as values voters but whose values are toxic, from simple folk whose simplicity, far from being admirable, is better labeled ignorance, from ‘all-American’ types whose patriotism is a dagger pointed at the very heart of the national interest ... If fascism comes, it will be ushered in by tailgaters at the big football game, by Joe Six Pack ... If fascism comes it will dress like a hockey mom, or a NASCAR dad ... If fascism comes it will have a pajama party at Ann Coulter's house, pop pills with Rush Limbaugh, and go gay-bashing with Michael Savage, all in the same weekend.”
In 2009, Wise was affiliated with Progressives for Obama, which later changed its name to Progressive America Rising.

Wise is the author of three books: White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son (2005); Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and White (2005); and Speaking Treason Fluently: Anti-Racist Reflections From an Angry White Male (2008). He has also contributed to an anthology titled White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism (2001).

Wise received the 2001 British Diversity Award and the 2002 National Youth Advocacy Coalition’s Social Justice Impact Award. Michael Eric Dyson has called him “one of the most brilliant, articulate and courageous critics of white privilege in the nation.”

 

[Asclepias]

Blacks naming a school after Marcus Garvey would be like whites naming a School after Joseph Stalin. The same goes for W.E.B Dubois and Paul Robeson. All admired Stalin and thought communism was the way forward for negro improvement. Each of them inspired African countries to seek a Sovietesque model at the Pan African Congress. All of them were communists. All of them praised the Soviet Union and trashed the United States despite knowing perfectly well that the Soviets were killing innocent people in multiples of that of Nazi Germany. Indeed, when faced with Jim Crow they advocated not for freedom, but for enslavement of all races. What a great inspiration for black culture.

If you can name schools after Washington and Jefferson etc who owned slaves and whiffed on the chance to free them, then we can name schools after Marcus Garvey. Stop whining about who our heroes are and look at yours. Cecil Rhodes was a genocidal serial killer and they have a scholarship named after him. What a great inspiration for white culture.

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8SIINVfqnxw]White Privilege, Racism, White Denial & The Cost of Inequality - YouTube[/ame]

So your argument falls on this: It is ok to justify a wrong for a perceived wrong? Of course, I never said it was wrong to name the schools after those Afrocentric black nationalist Stalinists (AND YES THEY WERE STALINISTS), I just thought it was counterintuitive for the advancement they wish to achieve.

Jefferson was in debt so his slaves belonged to the bank and Washington married into money so those slaves belonged to his wife.

And here it is. You give me Tim Wise. I have been waiting for the longest time to get your take on white privilege. Of course, if Tim Wise believed half of the stuff he was spewing he would live in a multicultural neighborhood. He does not. He lives in an almost exclusively white neighborhood and makes his money as a white race peddler. I have read his books and I have already seen his lectures.

Tim Wise has found race peddling so profitable that he never bothered to attain a graduate degree and he is affiliated with STORM (STANDING TOGETHER TO ORGANIZE A REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT), COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR DEMOCRACY AND SOCIALISM, And Z Magazine.

Of course, if "white privilege" is such a barrier on black advancement then why in hell do the Asians out perform every demographic in the United States? And there it is, "white privilege" philosophy is dismantled in one sentence.

TIM WISE Tim Wise - Discover the Networks

•Self-described “antiracist essayist”
•Views the United States as a nation rife with white racism
•Lectures across the United States about the need to “combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.”

Tim Wise is a self-described “antiracist essayist” whose career is devoted to condemning the “white racism” and “white privilege” which, in his view, infest America. He also serves as a Board of Advisors member for Grassroots International.

Wise was born in Nashville, Tennessee in October 1968. He attended Tulane University, where he served as a leader of the campus’ anti-apartheid movement, pressuring the school to divest its assets from U.S. companies that conducted any business with the South African government. When Tulane failed to comply, Wise in 1988 persuaded Archbishop Desmond Tutu to turn down an honorary degree which the university was planning to award him. Wise graduated in 1990 with a B.A. in Political Science and a minor in Latin American Studies.

In the early 1990s, Wise received training as an antiracist activist from the New Orleans-based People's Institute for Survival and Beyond (PISB). Challenging its trainees “to analyze the structures of power and privilege that hinder social equity,” PISB contends that racism “is the single most critical barrier to building effective coalitions for social change.”

Wise’s first job in the field came as the youth coordinator for the Louisiana Coalition Against Racism and Nazism, which was originally founded to help defeat the political ambitions of Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, David Duke. From 1999 to 2003, Wise served as an advisor to the Fisk University Race Relations Institute.

In January 2002, Wise endorsed War Times, an anti-Iraq War newspaper produced by a group of San Francisco leftists, most of whom were affiliated with the radical organizations STORM and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). At a CCDS national convention six months later, Wise spoke on the topic os "Racism in the Present Era."

Though he held no graduate degree of any kind, in 2005 Wise served as an adjunct faculty member at the Smith College School for Social Work, where he co-taught a Master's-level class on racism in the United States.

Wise is the founder and director of the Association for White Anti-Racist Education (AWARE). Based in Brentwood, Tennessee, AWARE’s mission is “to educate white Americans about ongoing institutional racism in society; to raise awareness among whites to the harmful effects racism has on people of color and themselves; and to provide the tools for whites to support equity and justice.”

Wise has parlayed his racial angst into a speaking career that has included stops at more than 350 college campuses across the United States, where he lectures about the need to “combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.” Viewing America as a nation overrun by white racists ever-eager to ambush blacks and other minorities, Wise defines the American experience as an exercise in white privilege which can be countered only by an enlightened vanguard of antiracist whites such as himself.

Regularly posting his columns and opinion pieces on Z-Mag, Wise claims that the ever-increasing prosperity of the black middle class since the 1980s is essentially a meaningless statistical trick, and that blacks should receive preferential treatment in employment and academia.

Wise charges that U.S. troops in Iraq are in violation of Article 54 of the Geneva Convention, by which “t is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,” such as food, water, or livestock.

Wise has made evident his rabid anti-Catholicism, manifest in sardonic criticisms of the pope, of the Church’s position on abortion, and of the pedophilia scandal that rocked the Church.

Wise has compared America’s founding fathers to the Mujahadeen of Afghanistan

Wise is an incessant critic of Israel, which he views as a racist colonizer of Palestine; he alleges that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons should be considered no more acceptable than the potential acquisition of such an arsenal by the mullahs of Iran.

Wise loathes capitalism; he finds the U.S. prison system racist; he urges a complete overhaul of the criminal-justice system; and he advocates reparations not only to the descendants of slaves, but to all “people of color.”

Preceding the 2004 presidential election, Wise was a signatory to “Bush Can Be Stopped: A Letter to the Left,” which aimed to prevent the re-election of George W. Bush. The letter also appealed for public support for such organizations as MoveOn, U.S. Labor Against War, United for Peace and Justice, and Win Without War. Wise's fellow signers included Leslie Cagan, Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis, Carl Davidson, Ossie Davis, Ruby Dee, Manning Marable, Robert Meeropol, Michael Ratner, and Pete Seeger.

Wise characterized the American government’s allegedly slow response to Hurricane Katrina, which devastated the heavily black city of New Orleans in 2005, as follows:

“...n the wake of Hurricane Katrina, government at all levels and across party lines has engaged in ethnic cleansing in New Orleans, failing to provide rental assistance to the mostly black tenant base for over a year, plotting to tear down 5,000 perfectly usable units of public housing, failing to restart the city's public health care infrastructure, and even ordering the Red Cross not to provide relief in the first few days after the city flooded in September 2005, so as to force evacuation and empty out the city …”

In 2008, Wise maintained that the nomination of Senator Barack Obama as the Democrat presidential candidate could not be interpreted as evidence that America had become a land of opportunity for blacks as well as whites. Rather, pointing to the fact that Obama had largely avoided focusing on race-related issues in his campaign, Wise concluded that racism was in fact more prevalent than ever. In a March 2008 essay titled “Uh-Obama: Racism, White Voters and the Myth of Color-Blindness,” Wise wrote:

“Surely, that Obama is constrained in his ability to focus any real attention on these matters, suggests that whatever his success may say about America and race, one thing it utterly fails to say is that we have conquered the racial demons that have so long bedeviled us. And to the extent he must remain relatively silent about these issues, lest he find his political ascent headed in a decidedly different direction, it is true, however ironic, that his success actually confirms the salience of white power. If, in order to be elected, a man of color has to pander to white folks, in ways that no white politician would ever have to do to people who were black or brown, then white privilege and white power remain operative realities ... His success, far from disproving white power and privilege, confirms it with a vengeance.”

In an October 11, 2008 blog entry, Wise warned that an age of fascism would arise if Republican candidate John McCain were to be elected President in the upcoming election. Wrote Wise:

“If fascism comes, it will spring from the soil of middle America, from people known as values voters but whose values are toxic, from simple folk whose simplicity, far from being admirable, is better labeled ignorance, from ‘all-American’ types whose patriotism is a dagger pointed at the very heart of the national interest ... If fascism comes, it will be ushered in by tailgaters at the big football game, by Joe Six Pack ... If fascism comes it will dress like a hockey mom, or a NASCAR dad ... If fascism comes it will have a pajama party at Ann Coulter's house, pop pills with Rush Limbaugh, and go gay-bashing with Michael Savage, all in the same weekend.”
In 2009, Wise was affiliated with Progressives for Obama, which later changed its name to Progressive America Rising.

Wise is the author of three books: White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son (2005); Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and White (2005); and Speaking Treason Fluently: Anti-Racist Reflections From an Angry White Male (2008). He has also contributed to an anthology titled White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism (2001).

Wise received the 2001 British Diversity Award and the 2002 National Youth Advocacy Coalition’s Social Justice Impact Award. Michael Eric Dyson has called him “one of the most brilliant, articulate and courageous critics of white privilege in the nation.”

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Your white privilege rebuttal fails for a couple of reasons. I'm not Asian for 1 and for 2 Asians conform until they can take you over. 3. Asians never had their history, culture, and religion taken from them. 4. They studied your ideology and got better at it than whites did. Thats why they pretty much have a death grip on the US right now and literally spent about 3 billion on real estate in 2012 alone. This Tim Wise guy may be pedaling something but he is speaking the truth. Whats funny is you think I care if he has a graduate degree or not. . Is a graduate degree supposed to make him more or less credible to me? Typically people who place emphasis on titles and education as indicators of truth are easily led. You should really re-evaluate your position. Truth is truth no matter who speaks it.

 

[Publius1787]

If you can name schools after Washington and Jefferson etc who owned slaves and whiffed on the chance to free them, then we can name schools after Marcus Garvey. Stop whining about who our heroes are and look at yours. Cecil Rhodes was a genocidal serial killer and they have a scholarship named after him. What a great inspiration for white culture.

White Privilege, Racism, White Denial & The Cost of Inequality - YouTube

So your argument falls on this: It is ok to justify a wrong for a perceived wrong? Of course, I never said it was wrong to name the schools after those Afrocentric black nationalist Stalinists (AND YES THEY WERE STALINISTS), I just thought it was counterintuitive for the advancement they wish to achieve.

Jefferson was in debt so his slaves belonged to the bank and Washington married into money so those slaves belonged to his wife.

And here it is. You give me Tim Wise. I have been waiting for the longest time to get your take on white privilege. Of course, if Tim Wise believed half of the stuff he was spewing he would live in a multicultural neighborhood. He does not. He lives in an almost exclusively white neighborhood and makes his money as a white race peddler. I have read his books and I have already seen his lectures.

Tim Wise has found race peddling so profitable that he never bothered to attain a graduate degree and he is affiliated with STORM (STANDING TOGETHER TO ORGANIZE A REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT), COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR DEMOCRACY AND SOCIALISM, And Z Magazine.

Of course, if "white privilege" is such a barrier on black advancement then why in hell do the Asians out perform every demographic in the United States? And there it is, "white privilege" philosophy is dismantled in one sentence.

TIM WISE Tim Wise - Discover the Networks

•Self-described “antiracist essayist”
•Views the United States as a nation rife with white racism
•Lectures across the United States about the need to “combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.”

Tim Wise is a self-described “antiracist essayist” whose career is devoted to condemning the “white racism” and “white privilege” which, in his view, infest America. He also serves as a Board of Advisors member for Grassroots International.

Wise was born in Nashville, Tennessee in October 1968. He attended Tulane University, where he served as a leader of the campus’ anti-apartheid movement, pressuring the school to divest its assets from U.S. companies that conducted any business with the South African government. When Tulane failed to comply, Wise in 1988 persuaded Archbishop Desmond Tutu to turn down an honorary degree which the university was planning to award him. Wise graduated in 1990 with a B.A. in Political Science and a minor in Latin American Studies.

In the early 1990s, Wise received training as an antiracist activist from the New Orleans-based People's Institute for Survival and Beyond (PISB). Challenging its trainees “to analyze the structures of power and privilege that hinder social equity,” PISB contends that racism “is the single most critical barrier to building effective coalitions for social change.”

Wise’s first job in the field came as the youth coordinator for the Louisiana Coalition Against Racism and Nazism, which was originally founded to help defeat the political ambitions of Ku Klux Klan Grand Wizard, David Duke. From 1999 to 2003, Wise served as an advisor to the Fisk University Race Relations Institute.

In January 2002, Wise endorsed War Times, an anti-Iraq War newspaper produced by a group of San Francisco leftists, most of whom were affiliated with the radical organizations STORM and the Committees of Correspondence for Democracy and Socialism (CCDS). At a CCDS national convention six months later, Wise spoke on the topic os "Racism in the Present Era."

Though he held no graduate degree of any kind, in 2005 Wise served as an adjunct faculty member at the Smith College School for Social Work, where he co-taught a Master's-level class on racism in the United States.

Wise is the founder and director of the Association for White Anti-Racist Education (AWARE). Based in Brentwood, Tennessee, AWARE’s mission is “to educate white Americans about ongoing institutional racism in society; to raise awareness among whites to the harmful effects racism has on people of color and themselves; and to provide the tools for whites to support equity and justice.”

Wise has parlayed his racial angst into a speaking career that has included stops at more than 350 college campuses across the United States, where he lectures about the need to “combat institutional racism, gender bias, and the growing gap between rich and poor in the U.S.” Viewing America as a nation overrun by white racists ever-eager to ambush blacks and other minorities, Wise defines the American experience as an exercise in white privilege which can be countered only by an enlightened vanguard of antiracist whites such as himself.

Regularly posting his columns and opinion pieces on Z-Mag, Wise claims that the ever-increasing prosperity of the black middle class since the 1980s is essentially a meaningless statistical trick, and that blacks should receive preferential treatment in employment and academia.

Wise charges that U.S. troops in Iraq are in violation of Article 54 of the Geneva Convention, by which “t is prohibited to attack, destroy, remove or render useless objects indispensable to the survival of the civilian population,” such as food, water, or livestock.

Wise has made evident his rabid anti-Catholicism, manifest in sardonic criticisms of the pope, of the Church’s position on abortion, and of the pedophilia scandal that rocked the Church.

Wise has compared America’s founding fathers to the Mujahadeen of Afghanistan

Wise is an incessant critic of Israel, which he views as a racist colonizer of Palestine; he alleges that Israel’s possession of nuclear weapons should be considered no more acceptable than the potential acquisition of such an arsenal by the mullahs of Iran.

Wise loathes capitalism; he finds the U.S. prison system racist; he urges a complete overhaul of the criminal-justice system; and he advocates reparations not only to the descendants of slaves, but to all “people of color.”

Preceding the 2004 presidential election, Wise was a signatory to “Bush Can Be Stopped: A Letter to the Left,” which aimed to prevent the re-election of George W. Bush. The letter also appealed for public support for such organizations as MoveOn, U.S. Labor Against War, United for Peace and Justice, and Win Without War. Wise's fellow signers included Leslie Cagan, Noam Chomsky, Angela Davis, Carl Davidson, Ossie Davis, Ruby Dee, Manning Marable, Robert Meeropol, Michael Ratner, and Pete Seeger.

Wise characterized the American government’s allegedly slow response to Hurricane Katrina, which devastated the heavily black city of New Orleans in 2005, as follows:

“...n the wake of Hurricane Katrina, government at all levels and across party lines has engaged in ethnic cleansing in New Orleans, failing to provide rental assistance to the mostly black tenant base for over a year, plotting to tear down 5,000 perfectly usable units of public housing, failing to restart the city's public health care infrastructure, and even ordering the Red Cross not to provide relief in the first few days after the city flooded in September 2005, so as to force evacuation and empty out the city …”

In 2008, Wise maintained that the nomination of Senator Barack Obama as the Democrat presidential candidate could not be interpreted as evidence that America had become a land of opportunity for blacks as well as whites. Rather, pointing to the fact that Obama had largely avoided focusing on race-related issues in his campaign, Wise concluded that racism was in fact more prevalent than ever. In a March 2008 essay titled “Uh-Obama: Racism, White Voters and the Myth of Color-Blindness,” Wise wrote:

“Surely, that Obama is constrained in his ability to focus any real attention on these matters, suggests that whatever his success may say about America and race, one thing it utterly fails to say is that we have conquered the racial demons that have so long bedeviled us. And to the extent he must remain relatively silent about these issues, lest he find his political ascent headed in a decidedly different direction, it is true, however ironic, that his success actually confirms the salience of white power. If, in order to be elected, a man of color has to pander to white folks, in ways that no white politician would ever have to do to people who were black or brown, then white privilege and white power remain operative realities ... His success, far from disproving white power and privilege, confirms it with a vengeance.”

In an October 11, 2008 blog entry, Wise warned that an age of fascism would arise if Republican candidate John McCain were to be elected President in the upcoming election. Wrote Wise:

“If fascism comes, it will spring from the soil of middle America, from people known as values voters but whose values are toxic, from simple folk whose simplicity, far from being admirable, is better labeled ignorance, from ‘all-American’ types whose patriotism is a dagger pointed at the very heart of the national interest ... If fascism comes, it will be ushered in by tailgaters at the big football game, by Joe Six Pack ... If fascism comes it will dress like a hockey mom, or a NASCAR dad ... If fascism comes it will have a pajama party at Ann Coulter's house, pop pills with Rush Limbaugh, and go gay-bashing with Michael Savage, all in the same weekend.”
In 2009, Wise was affiliated with Progressives for Obama, which later changed its name to Progressive America Rising.

Wise is the author of three books: White Like Me: Reflections on Race from a Privileged Son (2005); Affirmative Action: Racial Preference in Black and White (2005); and Speaking Treason Fluently: Anti-Racist Reflections From an Angry White Male (2008). He has also contributed to an anthology titled White Privilege: Essential Readings on the Other Side of Racism (2001).

Wise received the 2001 British Diversity Award and the 2002 National Youth Advocacy Coalition’s Social Justice Impact Award. Michael Eric Dyson has called him “one of the most brilliant, articulate and courageous critics of white privilege in the nation.”

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Your white privilege rebuttal fails for a couple of reasons. I'm not Asian for 1 and for 2 Asians conform until they can take you over. 3. Asians never had their history, culture, and religion taken from them. 4. They studied your ideology and got better at it than whites did. Thats why they pretty much have a death grip on the US right now and literally spent about 3 billion on real estate in 2012 alone. This Tim Wise guy may be pedaling something but he is speaking the truth. Whats funny is you think I care if he has a graduate degree or not. . Is a graduate degree supposed to make him more or less credible to me? Typically people who place emphasis on titles and education as indicators of truth are easily led. You should really re-evaluate your position. Truth is truth no matter who speaks it.

Sure I defended them. Slavery was a natural and accepted circumstance of the times both in Africa and in the United States. And slaves were only counted as 3/5ths a person for congressional apportionment of representatives. It was to punish the slave states and that, more than anything else, led to the demise of slavery. I assume you know this history? Or shall I continue?

If you believe in white privilege then you must cede that you have black privilege because you could be stuck in Africa right now. Just think of all those privileges you enjoy in white mans civilization that you would be stripped of were you in Africa. You lucky dog! Perhaps we should charge you reparations for the increase in wealth you've acquired as opposed to being poor in Africa?

 

[Asclepias]

So your argument falls on this: It is ok to justify a wrong for a perceived wrong? Of course, I never said it was wrong to name the schools after those Afrocentric black nationalist Stalinists (AND YES THEY WERE STALINISTS), I just thought it was counterintuitive for the advancement they wish to achieve.

Jefferson was in debt so his slaves belonged to the bank and Washington married into money so those slaves belonged to his wife.

And here it is. You give me Tim Wise. I have been waiting for the longest time to get your take on white privilege. Of course, if Tim Wise believed half of the stuff he was spewing he would live in a multicultural neighborhood. He does not. He lives in an almost exclusively white neighborhood and makes his money as a white race peddler. I have read his books and I have already seen his lectures.

Tim Wise has found race peddling so profitable that he never bothered to attain a graduate degree and he is affiliated with STORM (STANDING TOGETHER TO ORGANIZE A REVOLUTIONARY MOVEMENT), COMMITTEES OF CORRESPONDENCE FOR DEMOCRACY AND SOCIALISM, And Z Magazine.

Of course, if "white privilege" is such a barrier on black advancement then why in hell do the Asians out perform every demographic in the United States? And there it is, "white privilege" philosophy is dismantled in one sentence.

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Your white privilege rebuttal fails for a couple of reasons. I'm not Asian for 1 and for 2 Asians conform until they can take you over. 3. Asians never had their history, culture, and religion taken from them. 4. They studied your ideology and got better at it than whites did. Thats why they pretty much have a death grip on the US right now and literally spent about 3 billion on real estate in 2012 alone. This Tim Wise guy may be pedaling something but he is speaking the truth. Whats funny is you think I care if he has a graduate degree or not. . Is a graduate degree supposed to make him more or less credible to me? Typically people who place emphasis on titles and education as indicators of truth are easily led. You should really re-evaluate your position. Truth is truth no matter who speaks it.

Sure I defended them. Slavery was a natural and accepted circumstance of the times both in Africa and in the United States. And slaves were only counted as 3/5ths a person for congressional apportionment of representatives. It was to punish the slave states and that, more than anything else, led to the demise of slavery. I assume you know this history? Or shall I continue?

If you believe in white privilege then you must cede that you have black privilege because you could be stuck in Africa right now. Just think of all those privileges you enjoy in white mans civilization that you would be stripped of were you in Africa. You lucky dog! Perhaps we should charge you reparations for the increase in wealth you've acquired as opposed to being poor in Africa?

You defended them because you feel that slavery was natural and acceptable. I defended Marcus Garvey because his thoughts were natural and acceptable. Why did you bring it up if it you had no issue with it? You have an odd interpretation of history. It was not a penalty it was a benefit. if the 3/5ths compromise was simply to punish the southern states why didn't the rule apply to anyone that was from the south and why did the south agree to it? Yes you should continue as it will be funny to see you attempt to squirm out of this.

Me believing in white privilege has nothing to do with you believing in Black privilege. How did you make that connection without me agreeing? What makes you think I am more privileged being in the US than i would be somewhere in Africa? Don't tell me you bought the propaganda! I happen to know different. You cant charge reparations when you were not done any wrong. Dont you know how reparations work? The dictionary is your friend.

 

[Publius1787]

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Your white privilege rebuttal fails for a couple of reasons. I'm not Asian for 1 and for 2 Asians conform until they can take you over. 3. Asians never had their history, culture, and religion taken from them. 4. They studied your ideology and got better at it than whites did. Thats why they pretty much have a death grip on the US right now and literally spent about 3 billion on real estate in 2012 alone. This Tim Wise guy may be pedaling something but he is speaking the truth. Whats funny is you think I care if he has a graduate degree or not. . Is a graduate degree supposed to make him more or less credible to me? Typically people who place emphasis on titles and education as indicators of truth are easily led. You should really re-evaluate your position. Truth is truth no matter who speaks it.

Sure I defended them. Slavery was a natural and accepted circumstance of the times both in Africa and in the United States. And slaves were only counted as 3/5ths a person for congressional apportionment of representatives. It was to punish the slave states and that, more than anything else, led to the demise of slavery. I assume you know this history? Or shall I continue?

If you believe in white privilege then you must cede that you have black privilege because you could be stuck in Africa right now. Just think of all those privileges you enjoy in white mans civilization that you would be stripped of were you in Africa. You lucky dog! Perhaps we should charge you reparations for the increase in wealth you've acquired as opposed to being poor in Africa?

You defended them because you feel that slavery was natural and acceptable. I defended Marcus Garvey because his thoughts were natural and acceptable. Why did you bring it up if it you had no issue with it? You have an odd interpretation of history. It was not a penalty it was a benefit. if the 3/5ths compromise was simply to punish the southern states why didn't the rule apply to anyone that was from the south and why did the south agree to it? Yes you should continue as it will be funny to see you attempt to squirm out of this.

Me believing in white privilege has nothing to do with you believing in Black privilege. How did you make that connection without me agreeing? What makes you think I am more privileged being in the US than i would be somewhere in Africa? Don't tell me you bought the propaganda! I happen to know different. You cant charge reparations when you were not done any wrong. Dont you know how reparations work? The dictionary is your friend.

The question was not whether one white man should receive one vote, although at the time, many could not vote due to the property qualification (But that is getting off topic). The question was, "if the House of Representatives were to be apportioned based on the population, then how should the slaves be counted?" The South wanted to count the slaves as one full person for congressional representation purposes, but for legal purposes they wanted them to be classified as property. The North thought that slaves, if they were to be counted as property, shouldn't count at all for the purposes of apportionment of Representatives to congress. The Philadelphia Convention (That's the Constitutional Convention for historical novices like yourself) came to a direct stand still and deliberation on the Constitution did not go forth until this problem was addressed. They settled on the 3/5ths compromise. This would later put the South at a electoral disadvantage as slaves only counted as 3/5ths for apportionment and migrants flocked to the north for industrial jobs and ignored the southern agrarian economy (Causing a sharp disproportional increase in the northern electorate). Without that southern electoral disadvantage, the North would have never had enough power to eventually threaten the existence of slavery and would have been in a much weaker position in the previous compromises leading up to the Civil War. Indeed, without the 3/5ths compromise slavery would have probably lasted much longer and the Civil War, along with the subsequent Reconstruction Amendments, would have taken much longer to achieve if they were achieved at all, setting the subsequent "Long Civil Rights Movement" back a great many years. In any case, the 3/5ths compromise was not because they thought that slaves were 3/5ths a person, but because the North refused to politically reward the South for being a slave holding nation. If the South had it their way, a slave would have counted as a full person for the purposes of congressional representation, which begs the question, DID YOU WANT THEM TO? Dumbass!

Your not the first black man/woman to have made such a racially based but ignorant observation of the 3/5ths compromise and you certainly won't be the last. I'll bet you teach your kids that "the evil white man considered us 3/5ths a person" too don't you? Yet another example of blacks spreading more ignorance to other blacks. They did not consider slaves to be 3/5ths of a human you dumbass, they were only considered 3/5ths a person FOR THE PURPOSES OF ALLOCATING CONGRESSMEN TO THE HOUSE!!! If slaves were to be counted as a full person the South would have had more power you freaking retard! Oh, and the Constitution didn't say "blacks," as many freedmen, i.e. BLACKS, could vote! What it actually said was "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." Have you EVER read the U.S. Constitution? Are you at least beginning to see how little you truly know about the most basic and elementary elements of US history when you don't even know what the hell the 3/5ths compromise was?



Stalinists who knew Stalin was murdering millions but sided with him anyway can not be forgiven for their willful ignorance.

The only connection that I made was to use the same methodology that people use with respect to "white privilege," but apply it to blacks who would not have the privileges they enjoy today had their ancestors not been enslaved. It was simply a means to make a mockery out of "white privilege" and it was quite a successful means at that. That is, if you take the idea of "white privilege" seriously.

Lets see here, The average African makes $400 a year, the average African American makes, oh lets say $30,000 a year. The way I see it, you have $26,000 of pure black privilege for living in the white mans civilization in net income alone. Of course, this also does not take into account the price of peace, stability, educational improvement, and other public services.

 

[Asclepias]

Sure I defended them. Slavery was a natural and accepted circumstance of the times both in Africa and in the United States. And slaves were only counted as 3/5ths a person for congressional apportionment of representatives. It was to punish the slave states and that, more than anything else, led to the demise of slavery. I assume you know this history? Or shall I continue?

If you believe in white privilege then you must cede that you have black privilege because you could be stuck in Africa right now. Just think of all those privileges you enjoy in white mans civilization that you would be stripped of were you in Africa. You lucky dog! Perhaps we should charge you reparations for the increase in wealth you've acquired as opposed to being poor in Africa?

You defended them because you feel that slavery was natural and acceptable. I defended Marcus Garvey because his thoughts were natural and acceptable. Why did you bring it up if it you had no issue with it? You have an odd interpretation of history. It was not a penalty it was a benefit. if the 3/5ths compromise was simply to punish the southern states why didn't the rule apply to anyone that was from the south and why did the south agree to it? Yes you should continue as it will be funny to see you attempt to squirm out of this.

Me believing in white privilege has nothing to do with you believing in Black privilege. How did you make that connection without me agreeing? What makes you think I am more privileged being in the US than i would be somewhere in Africa? Don't tell me you bought the propaganda! I happen to know different. You cant charge reparations when you were not done any wrong. Dont you know how reparations work? The dictionary is your friend.

The question was not whether one white man should receive one vote, although at the time, many could not vote due to the property qualification (But that is getting off topic). The question was, "if the House of Representatives were to be apportioned based on the population, then how should the slaves be counted?" The South wanted to count the slaves as one full person for congressional representation purposes, but for legal purposes they wanted them to be classified as property. The North thought that slaves, if they were to be counted as property, shouldn't count at all for the purposes of apportionment of Representatives to congress. The Philadelphia Convention came to a direct stand still and the passage of the Constitution did not go forth until this problem was addressed. They settled on the 3/5ths compromise. This would later put the South at a electoral disadvantage as migrants flocked to the north for industrial jobs and ignored the southern agrarian economy (With the northern electorate increasing). Without that southern electoral disadvantage, the North would have never had enough power to eventually threaten the existence of slavery and would have been in a much weaker position in the previous compromises leading up to the Civil War. Indeed, without the 3/5ths compromise slavery would have probably lasted much longer and the Civil War, along with the subsequent Reconstruction Amendments, would have taken much longer to achieve, setting the subsequent "Long Civil Rights Movement" back a great many years. In any case, the 3/5ths compromise was not because they thought that slaves were 3/5ths a person, but because the North refused to politically reward the South for being a slave holding nation. If the South had it their way, a slave would have counted as a full person for the purposes of congressional representation, which begs the question, DID YOU WANT THEM TO? Dumbass! Your not the first black man/woman to have made such an racially based but ignorant observation of the 3/5ths compromise and you certainly won't be the last. I'll bet you teach your kids this too don't you? Yet another example of blacks spreading more ignorance to other blacks. They did not consider slaves to be 3/5ths of a human you dumbass, they were only considered 3/5ths a person FOR THE PURPOSES OF ALLOCATING CONGRESSMEN TO THE HOUSE!!! If slaves were to be counted as a full person the South would have had more power you freaking retard! Oh, and the Constitution didn't say "blacks," as many freedmen could vote. What it actually said was "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." Have you EVER read the U.S. Constitution?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0]Billy Madison - Ultimate Insult (Academic Decathlon)[Forum Weapon][How To Troll][Ignorance Is Bliss] - YouTube[/ame]

Stalinists who knew Stalin was murdering millions but sided with him anyway can not be forgiven for their willful ignorance.

The only connection that I made was to use the same methodology that people use with respect to "white privilege," but apply it to blacks who would not have the privileges they enjoy today had their ancestors not been enslaved. It was simply a means to make a mockery out of "white privilege" and it was quite a successful means at that. That is, if you take the idea of "white privilege" seriously.

Lets see here, The average African makes $400 a year, the average African American makes, oh lets say $30,000 a year. The way I see it, you have $26,000 of pure black privilege for living in the white mans civilization in net income alone. Of course, this also does not take into account the price of peace, stability, educational improvement, and other public services.

You typed all of that and still failed. You said it was a penalty for the south then you went ahead proved yourself wrong. If slaves could not vote how is giving the south 3/5ths of a person to count towards a vote a penalty? Under normal circumstances property would not be able to vote at all as you pointed out while confusing yourself. The south gained by getting those votes dumbass. Also where did I advocate for the south to get the votes? Please quote that one. You are reaching for a life raft because you are drowning. Lets not make up little scenarios and questions I said nothing about. BTW enlarging your font shows a weakness. Try not to yell.

Either you are playing stupid or you really are. Which one is it? There has never been anything even close to Black privilege here in the US. if i was in Africa I would enjoy Black privilege. I'm not quite sure why you think that would not happen. As I pointed out to you before I have traveled and know Americans that live in Africa now. They enjoy the same freedoms we do here dummy. In case you are completely clueless averages don't pertain to me. I'm not an average anything so your money scenario falls down and breaks its knee caps even it was a relevant point. I would make more money in Africa to be perfectly honest. Money is not everything. Clowns like you that don't have money miss that distinction because you worry about it all the time. The way I see it unless someone is giving me money for free I don't owe anyone anything. My ancestors built this land not whites. You should be paying me reparations for free labor.

 

[Publius1787]

You defended them because you feel that slavery was natural and acceptable. I defended Marcus Garvey because his thoughts were natural and acceptable. Why did you bring it up if it you had no issue with it? You have an odd interpretation of history. It was not a penalty it was a benefit. if the 3/5ths compromise was simply to punish the southern states why didn't the rule apply to anyone that was from the south and why did the south agree to it? Yes you should continue as it will be funny to see you attempt to squirm out of this.

Me believing in white privilege has nothing to do with you believing in Black privilege. How did you make that connection without me agreeing? What makes you think I am more privileged being in the US than i would be somewhere in Africa? Don't tell me you bought the propaganda! I happen to know different. You cant charge reparations when you were not done any wrong. Dont you know how reparations work? The dictionary is your friend.

The question was not whether one white man should receive one vote, although at the time, many could not vote due to the property qualification (But that is getting off topic). The question was, "if the House of Representatives were to be apportioned based on the population, then how should the slaves be counted?" The South wanted to count the slaves as one full person for congressional representation purposes, but for legal purposes they wanted them to be classified as property. The North thought that slaves, if they were to be counted as property, shouldn't count at all for the purposes of apportionment of Representatives to congress. The Philadelphia Convention came to a direct stand still and the passage of the Constitution did not go forth until this problem was addressed. They settled on the 3/5ths compromise. This would later put the South at a electoral disadvantage as migrants flocked to the north for industrial jobs and ignored the southern agrarian economy (With the northern electorate increasing). Without that southern electoral disadvantage, the North would have never had enough power to eventually threaten the existence of slavery and would have been in a much weaker position in the previous compromises leading up to the Civil War. Indeed, without the 3/5ths compromise slavery would have probably lasted much longer and the Civil War, along with the subsequent Reconstruction Amendments, would have taken much longer to achieve, setting the subsequent "Long Civil Rights Movement" back a great many years. In any case, the 3/5ths compromise was not because they thought that slaves were 3/5ths a person, but because the North refused to politically reward the South for being a slave holding nation. If the South had it their way, a slave would have counted as a full person for the purposes of congressional representation, which begs the question, DID YOU WANT THEM TO? Dumbass! Your not the first black man/woman to have made such an racially based but ignorant observation of the 3/5ths compromise and you certainly won't be the last. I'll bet you teach your kids this too don't you? Yet another example of blacks spreading more ignorance to other blacks. They did not consider slaves to be 3/5ths of a human you dumbass, they were only considered 3/5ths a person FOR THE PURPOSES OF ALLOCATING CONGRESSMEN TO THE HOUSE!!! If slaves were to be counted as a full person the South would have had more power you freaking retard! Oh, and the Constitution didn't say "blacks," as many freedmen could vote. What it actually said was "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." Have you EVER read the U.S. Constitution?

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0]Billy Madison - Ultimate Insult (Academic Decathlon)[Forum Weapon][How To Troll][Ignorance Is Bliss] - YouTube[/ame]

Stalinists who knew Stalin was murdering millions but sided with him anyway can not be forgiven for their willful ignorance.

The only connection that I made was to use the same methodology that people use with respect to "white privilege," but apply it to blacks who would not have the privileges they enjoy today had their ancestors not been enslaved. It was simply a means to make a mockery out of "white privilege" and it was quite a successful means at that. That is, if you take the idea of "white privilege" seriously.

Lets see here, The average African makes $400 a year, the average African American makes, oh lets say $30,000 a year. The way I see it, you have $26,000 of pure black privilege for living in the white mans civilization in net income alone. Of course, this also does not take into account the price of peace, stability, educational improvement, and other public services.

You typed all of that and still failed. You said it was a penalty for the south then you went ahead proved yourself wrong. If slaves could not vote how is giving the south 3/5ths of a person to count towards a vote a penalty? Under normal circumstances property would not be able to vote at all as you pointed out while confusing yourself. The south gained by getting those votes dumbass. Also where did I advocated for the south to get the votes? Please quote that one. You are reaching for a life raft because you are drowning. Lets not make up little scenarios and questions I said nothing about. BTW enlarging your font shows a weakness. Try not to yell.

Either you are playing stupid or you really are. Which one is it? There has never been anything even close to Black privilege here in the US. if i was in Africa I would enjoy Black privilege. I'm not quite sure why you think that would not happen. As I pointed out to you before I have traveled and know Americans that live in Africa now. They enjoy the same freedoms we do here dummy. In case you are completely clueless averages don't pertain to me. I'm not an average anything so your money scenario falls down and breaks its knee caps even it was a relevant point. I would make more money in Africa to be perfectly honest. Money is not everything. Clowns like you that don't have money miss that distinction because you worry about it all the time. The way I see it unless someone is giving me money for free I don't owe anyone anything. My ancestors built this land not whites. You should be paying me reparations for free labor.

MY GOD MAN! 3/5ths a person was not counted toward a vote! 3/5ths was counted toward the census, of which, was used to determine how many congressmen were to get ONE vote in the House of Representatives and how many votes each state would get for the electoral college! Did you want them to be counted as a whole and increase the South's power by at most 2/5ths such that the end of slavery and the beginning of civil rights would have been pushed back for decades? Judging by what you wrote below, the answer to that is yes! Forget the rest of our conversation, it seems that you are so historically ignorant you are unworthy of both my time and patience. Even when the truth is painted right in front of you it goes ignored. How can I debate a man with the mind of a child?

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

 

[Asclepias]

The question was not whether one white man should receive one vote, although at the time, many could not vote due to the property qualification (But that is getting off topic). The question was, "if the House of Representatives were to be apportioned based on the population, then how should the slaves be counted?" The South wanted to count the slaves as one full person for congressional representation purposes, but for legal purposes they wanted them to be classified as property. The North thought that slaves, if they were to be counted as property, shouldn't count at all for the purposes of apportionment of Representatives to congress. The Philadelphia Convention came to a direct stand still and the passage of the Constitution did not go forth until this problem was addressed. They settled on the 3/5ths compromise. This would later put the South at a electoral disadvantage as migrants flocked to the north for industrial jobs and ignored the southern agrarian economy (With the northern electorate increasing). Without that southern electoral disadvantage, the North would have never had enough power to eventually threaten the existence of slavery and would have been in a much weaker position in the previous compromises leading up to the Civil War. Indeed, without the 3/5ths compromise slavery would have probably lasted much longer and the Civil War, along with the subsequent Reconstruction Amendments, would have taken much longer to achieve, setting the subsequent "Long Civil Rights Movement" back a great many years. In any case, the 3/5ths compromise was not because they thought that slaves were 3/5ths a person, but because the North refused to politically reward the South for being a slave holding nation. If the South had it their way, a slave would have counted as a full person for the purposes of congressional representation, which begs the question, DID YOU WANT THEM TO? Dumbass! Your not the first black man/woman to have made such an racially based but ignorant observation of the 3/5ths compromise and you certainly won't be the last. I'll bet you teach your kids this too don't you? Yet another example of blacks spreading more ignorance to other blacks. They did not consider slaves to be 3/5ths of a human you dumbass, they were only considered 3/5ths a person FOR THE PURPOSES OF ALLOCATING CONGRESSMEN TO THE HOUSE!!! If slaves were to be counted as a full person the South would have had more power you freaking retard! Oh, and the Constitution didn't say "blacks," as many freedmen could vote. What it actually said was "Representatives and direct Taxes shall be apportioned among the several States which may be included within this Union, according to their respective Numbers, which shall be determined by adding to the whole Number of free Persons, including those bound to Service for a Term of Years, and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons." Have you EVER read the U.S. Constitution?

Billy Madison - Ultimate Insult (Academic Decathlon)[Forum Weapon][How To Troll][Ignorance Is Bliss] - YouTube

Stalinists who knew Stalin was murdering millions but sided with him anyway can not be forgiven for their willful ignorance.

The only connection that I made was to use the same methodology that people use with respect to "white privilege," but apply it to blacks who would not have the privileges they enjoy today had their ancestors not been enslaved. It was simply a means to make a mockery out of "white privilege" and it was quite a successful means at that. That is, if you take the idea of "white privilege" seriously.

Lets see here, The average African makes $400 a year, the average African American makes, oh lets say $30,000 a year. The way I see it, you have $26,000 of pure black privilege for living in the white mans civilization in net income alone. Of course, this also does not take into account the price of peace, stability, educational improvement, and other public services.

You typed all of that and still failed. You said it was a penalty for the south then you went ahead proved yourself wrong. If slaves could not vote how is giving the south 3/5ths of a person to count towards a vote a penalty? Under normal circumstances property would not be able to vote at all as you pointed out while confusing yourself. The south gained by getting those votes dumbass. Also where did I advocated for the south to get the votes? Please quote that one. You are reaching for a life raft because you are drowning. Lets not make up little scenarios and questions I said nothing about. BTW enlarging your font shows a weakness. Try not to yell.

Either you are playing stupid or you really are. Which one is it? There has never been anything even close to Black privilege here in the US. if i was in Africa I would enjoy Black privilege. I'm not quite sure why you think that would not happen. As I pointed out to you before I have traveled and know Americans that live in Africa now. They enjoy the same freedoms we do here dummy. In case you are completely clueless averages don't pertain to me. I'm not an average anything so your money scenario falls down and breaks its knee caps even it was a relevant point. I would make more money in Africa to be perfectly honest. Money is not everything. Clowns like you that don't have money miss that distinction because you worry about it all the time. The way I see it unless someone is giving me money for free I don't owe anyone anything. My ancestors built this land not whites. You should be paying me reparations for free labor.

MY GOD MAN! 3/5ths a person was not counted to a vote! 3/5ths was counted toward the census, of which, was used to determine how many congressmen were to get a vote in the House of Representatives! Did you want them to be counted as a whole and increase the South's power by at most 2/5ths such that the end of slavery and the beginning of civil rights would have been pushed back for decades? Judging by what you wrote below, the answer to that is yes! Forget the rest of our conversation, it seems that you are so historically ignorant you are unworthy of both my time an patients. Even when the truth is painted right in front of you it goes ignored. How can I debate a man with the mind of a child?

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Dont get frustrated Pubis. Lets cut to the chase. Did counting the slaves as 3/5ths of a person cause a gain or loss in voting power for the south? Why are you asking me what I wanted and what does that have to do with you being wrong? You said it was a penalty. Please show me where if a piece of property would not have been counted? Lets focus on you explaining that one. I think you are just being intentionally stupid to be honest.

As far as living a good life in Africa I could run my business from over there and also take contract jobs engineering. I get calls and emails everyday regarding opportunities in Africa.

 

[Publius1787]

You typed all of that and still failed. You said it was a penalty for the south then you went ahead proved yourself wrong. If slaves could not vote how is giving the south 3/5ths of a person to count towards a vote a penalty? Under normal circumstances property would not be able to vote at all as you pointed out while confusing yourself. The south gained by getting those votes dumbass. Also where did I advocated for the south to get the votes? Please quote that one. You are reaching for a life raft because you are drowning. Lets not make up little scenarios and questions I said nothing about. BTW enlarging your font shows a weakness. Try not to yell.

Either you are playing stupid or you really are. Which one is it? There has never been anything even close to Black privilege here in the US. if i was in Africa I would enjoy Black privilege. I'm not quite sure why you think that would not happen. As I pointed out to you before I have traveled and know Americans that live in Africa now. They enjoy the same freedoms we do here dummy. In case you are completely clueless averages don't pertain to me. I'm not an average anything so your money scenario falls down and breaks its knee caps even it was a relevant point. I would make more money in Africa to be perfectly honest. Money is not everything. Clowns like you that don't have money miss that distinction because you worry about it all the time. The way I see it unless someone is giving me money for free I don't owe anyone anything. My ancestors built this land not whites. You should be paying me reparations for free labor.

MY GOD MAN! 3/5ths a person was not counted to a vote! 3/5ths was counted toward the census, of which, was used to determine how many congressmen were to get a vote in the House of Representatives! Did you want them to be counted as a whole and increase the South's power by at most 2/5ths such that the end of slavery and the beginning of civil rights would have been pushed back for decades? Judging by what you wrote below, the answer to that is yes! Forget the rest of our conversation, it seems that you are so historically ignorant you are unworthy of both my time an patients. Even when the truth is painted right in front of you it goes ignored. How can I debate a man with the mind of a child?

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Dont get frustrated Pubis. Lets cut to the chase. Did counting the slaves as 3/5ths of a person cause a gain or loss in voting power for the south? Why are you asking me what I wanted and what does that have to do with you being wrong? You said it was a penalty. Please show me where if a piece of property would not have been counted? Lets focus on you explaining that one. I think you are just being intentionally stupid to be honest.

As far as living a good life in Africa I could run my business from over there and also take contract jobs engineering. I get calls and emails everyday regarding opportunities in Africa.

The South wanted to gain from it. The North wanted them to not to counted at all. Under the Articles of Confederation the states only had one vote each which took a majority of each state delegation to cast. Therefore, as compared to the voting power the South had under the Articles of Confederation, the 3/5ths compromise both helped and hurt the South. It hurt the South because they both lost possible representatives and Virginia was the most populous state at the time. It helped the South in that if the Constitution was passed, Virginia would be the immediate powerhouse in Congress. It helped the North because it gave them more electoral power than they otherwise would have had.

The point is that without the 3/5ths compromise there would have been no US Constitution, no US Constitution means that states would have been subject to the Articles of Confederation, and being subject to the Articles of Confederation means that the states would have gotten rid of slavery whenever they damn well pleased! The north did not want to reward the South for slavery and the South aimed to benefit electorally from it. Ceteris paribus the south lost votes on the matter. Anything less than 3/5ths and we would have lost the US Constitution. The 3/5ths compromise lead to the demise of slavery. The moment the US Constitution was signed and ratified was the moment the clock was set on the countdown to the end of slavery.

Frederick Douglass knew this. Why don't you?

 

[JQPublic1]

If you believe in white privilege then you must cede that you have black privilege because you could be stuck in Africa right now. Just think of all those privileges you enjoy in white mans civilization that you would be stripped of were you in Africa. You lucky dog! Perhaps we should charge you reparations for the increase in wealth you've acquired as opposed to being poor in Africa?

You're making quite an assumption here! Recent immigrants from Africa seem to have enough money to make the trip and send their children to the best universities in the USA, the UK and number of other western countries. I might add that these Africans are performing as well as or better, academically, than the Asians. An African renaissance has started in some African countries. Obviously its time for a re-evaluation on your part!

Something tells me that these immigrants were not living in squalor as African citizens and they are not living in squalor anywhere they migrate to.. Some have built enclaves based on the Chinatown model; the difference is that crime is reputed to be almost non existent in the Black immigrant communities. Further, it is reported that in some places where they live among American Blacks, African immigrants have assumed a positive role in curbing crime .. Advanced degrees and technical skills empower these Africans to transform communities in myriad positive ways.

 

[Mr. H.]

Blacks are people too.

I just wish they'd behave like people, too.

Yesh, them also.

 

[Publius1787]

If you believe in white privilege then you must cede that you have black privilege because you could be stuck in Africa right now. Just think of all those privileges you enjoy in white mans civilization that you would be stripped of were you in Africa. You lucky dog! Perhaps we should charge you reparations for the increase in wealth you've acquired as opposed to being poor in Africa?

You're making quite an assumption here! Recent immigrants from Africa seem to have enough money to make the trip and send their children to the best universities in the USA, the UK and number of other western countries. I might add that these Africans are performing as well as or better, academically, than the Asians. An African renaissance has started in some African countries. Obviously its time for a re-evaluation on your part!

Something tells me that these immigrants were not living in squalor as African citizens and they are not living in squalor anywhere they migrate to.. Some have built enclaves based on the Chinatown model; the difference is that crime is reputed to be almost non existent in the Black immigrant communities. Further, it is reported that in some places where they live among American Blacks, African immigrants have assumed a positive role in curbing crime .. Advanced degrees and technical skills empower these Africans to transform communities in myriad positive ways.

I agree that Africans preform well in US schools. I likewise know based on studies cited by John Hope Franklyn that US blacks have animosity toward Africans who come here an assimilate more with the white population than that of the black population. Christianbook.com: From Slavery to Freedom: A History of African Americans -9th edition: John Hope Franklin, Evelyn Brooks Higginbotham: 9780072963786 . In either case, this is easily explainable. African American culture is not African culture. Some African cultures do well here because they don't take things for granted. Some do well here because they can't achieve in their home countries because of violence and corruption. Most do well because they come from the corrupt and politically well connected elites of their home countries which make up the largest amount of foreign African students. In any case, they are the exception and not the rule in Africa. You will note that those who do the best come from whatever country stayed closest to their colonial models. On the whole, however, not even one percent of Africans get the opportunity to go to higher level schools (Forget college) and most live in squalor. The average West African makes less than $400 per year. You can spin it all you want, however, black Africa is among the lowest of the low places to live.

One more thing, if an African who was raised in poverty, violence, and squalor can achieve as you say, then what is the excuse for African Americans?

Africa has the potential to become an emerging economy, however, Africans are going to need to establish security and stave off corruption if they are ever going to hope to advance in the world. As of yet, I don't se it. If they aren't politically well connected or corrupt, they're going to need to rely on our benevolence to get here. That isn't happening to any great extent. Indeed, no one wants to loan them money because they have a record of not paying it back and no one wants to give them aid because they just have more babies they can't afford to feed. Some parts of Africa are advanced (Thank God for European Colonialism!), still most are not. On the whole they have hundreds of years of catching up to do.
http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/africa_hunger_facts.htm
http://data.worldbank.org/topic/poverty
http://www.our-africa.org/poverty
http://www.globalissues.org/article/26/poverty-facts-and-stats
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Poverty_in_Africa
http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-f...ica-challenge-end-extreme-poverty-2030-chandy

Here Thomas Sowell goes into detail on how some can achieve in one area but not the next. (I'm quite tired, forgive my sentence structure)




http://www.brookings.edu/blogs/up-f...ca-challenge-end-extreme-poverty-2030-chandy#

 

[Asclepias]

MY GOD MAN! 3/5ths a person was not counted to a vote! 3/5ths was counted toward the census, of which, was used to determine how many congressmen were to get a vote in the House of Representatives! Did you want them to be counted as a whole and increase the South's power by at most 2/5ths such that the end of slavery and the beginning of civil rights would have been pushed back for decades? Judging by what you wrote below, the answer to that is yes! Forget the rest of our conversation, it seems that you are so historically ignorant you are unworthy of both my time an patients. Even when the truth is painted right in front of you it goes ignored. How can I debate a man with the mind of a child?

Dont get frustrated Pubis. Lets cut to the chase. Did counting the slaves as 3/5ths of a person cause a gain or loss in voting power for the south? Why are you asking me what I wanted and what does that have to do with you being wrong? You said it was a penalty. Please show me where if a piece of property would not have been counted? Lets focus on you explaining that one. I think you are just being intentionally stupid to be honest.

As far as living a good life in Africa I could run my business from over there and also take contract jobs engineering. I get calls and emails everyday regarding opportunities in Africa.

The South wanted to gain from it. The North wanted them to not to counted at all. Under the Articles of Confederation the states only had one vote each which took a majority of each state delegation to cast. Therefore, as compared to the voting power the South had under the Articles of Confederation, the 3/5ths compromise both helped and hurt the South. It hurt the South because they both lost possible representatives and Virginia was the most populous state at the time. It helped the South in that if the Constitution was passed, Virginia would be the immediate powerhouse in Congress. It helped the North because it gave them more electoral power than they otherwise would have had.

The point is that without the 3/5ths compromise there would have been no US Constitution, no US Constitution means that states would have been subject to the Articles of Confederation, and being subject to the Articles of Confederation means that the states would have gotten rid of slavery whenever they damn well pleased! The north did not want to reward the South for slavery and the South aimed to benefit electorally from it. Ceteris paribus the south lost votes on the matter. Anything less than 3/5ths and we would have lost the US Constitution. The 3/5ths compromise lead to the demise of slavery. The moment the US Constitution was signed and ratified was the moment the clock was set on the countdown to the end of slavery.

Frederick Douglass knew this. Why don't you?

Your beating a dead end and doing it badly. The south benefited from the 3/5ths compromise. You were wrong in saying they were penalized. They also got the benefit of reduced taxation as well. Why are you bringing Fredrick Douglass into it? You were wrong. Why dont you just admit it?

 

[Publius1787]

Dont get frustrated Pubis. Lets cut to the chase. Did counting the slaves as 3/5ths of a person cause a gain or loss in voting power for the south? Why are you asking me what I wanted and what does that have to do with you being wrong? You said it was a penalty. Please show me where if a piece of property would not have been counted? Lets focus on you explaining that one. I think you are just being intentionally stupid to be honest.

As far as living a good life in Africa I could run my business from over there and also take contract jobs engineering. I get calls and emails everyday regarding opportunities in Africa.

The South wanted to gain from it. The North wanted them to not to counted at all. Under the Articles of Confederation the states only had one vote each which took a majority of each state delegation to cast. Therefore, as compared to the voting power the South had under the Articles of Confederation, the 3/5ths compromise both helped and hurt the South. It hurt the South because they both lost possible representatives and Virginia was the most populous state at the time. It helped the South in that if the Constitution was passed, Virginia would be the immediate powerhouse in Congress. It helped the North because it gave them more electoral power than they otherwise would have had. In fact, blacks were not counted as 3/5ths a person for purposes for representative enumeration, but slaves were.

The point is that without the 3/5ths compromise there would have been no US Constitution, no US Constitution means that states would have been subject to the Articles of Confederation, and being subject to the Articles of Confederation means that the states would have gotten rid of slavery whenever they damn well pleased! The north did not want to reward the South for slavery and the South aimed to benefit electorally from it. Ceteris paribus the south lost votes on the matter. Anything less than 3/5ths and we would have lost the US Constitution. The 3/5ths compromise lead to the demise of slavery. The moment the US Constitution was signed and ratified was the moment the clock was set on the countdown to the end of slavery.

Frederick Douglass knew this. Why don't you?

Your beating a dead end and doing it badly. The south benefited from the 3/5ths compromise. You were wrong in saying they were penalized. They also got the benefit of reduced taxation as well. Why are you bringing Fredrick Douglass into it? You were wrong. Why dont you just admit it?

The above is contradiction, it is not an argument. An argument requires that you cite proof. Besides, you complained that "blacks " (not slaves) were only counted as "3/5ths a person" as if they should have been counted as a whole. You were lamenting that "blacks" (lol not slaves though free blacks could in fact vote) were only counted as 3/5ths a person without the knowledge that counting them as a whole would have spelled disaster for the prospects of abolition and civil rights. Therefore, you now have moved the bar of an argument to a compromise where it can be both argued that the South gained power and lost it at the same time. Your first statement on the "3/5ths of a person" was dead wrong and inaccurate and you probably teach this to others as to stoke racial animosity. The 3/5ths compromise was by design a punishment in terms of representation for being a slave state and it afforded the North to eventually take the electoral advantage and force their hand in creating the 14th Amendment, a story that I am sure that you omit.. In any case, I was glad to have brought you back to reality.

 

[Asclepias]

The South wanted to gain from it. The North wanted them to not to counted at all. Under the Articles of Confederation the states only had one vote each which took a majority of each state delegation to cast. Therefore, as compared to the voting power the South had under the Articles of Confederation, the 3/5ths compromise both helped and hurt the South. It hurt the South because they both lost possible representatives and Virginia was the most populous state at the time. It helped the South in that if the Constitution was passed, Virginia would be the immediate powerhouse in Congress. It helped the North because it gave them more electoral power than they otherwise would have had.

The point is that without the 3/5ths compromise there would have been no US Constitution, no US Constitution means that states would have been subject to the Articles of Confederation, and being subject to the Articles of Confederation means that the states would have gotten rid of slavery whenever they damn well pleased! The north did not want to reward the South for slavery and the South aimed to benefit electorally from it. Ceteris paribus the south lost votes on the matter. Anything less than 3/5ths and we would have lost the US Constitution. The 3/5ths compromise lead to the demise of slavery. The moment the US Constitution was signed and ratified was the moment the clock was set on the countdown to the end of slavery.

Frederick Douglass knew this. Why don't you?

Your beating a dead end and doing it badly. The south benefited from the 3/5ths compromise. You were wrong in saying they were penalized. They also got the benefit of reduced taxation as well. Why are you bringing Fredrick Douglass into it? You were wrong. Why dont you just admit it?

The above is contradiction, it is not an argument. An argument requires that you cite proof. Besides, you complained that "blacks " (not slaves) were only counted as "3/5ths a person" as if they should have been counted as a whole. You were lamenting that "blacks" (lol not slaves though free blacks could in fact vote) were only counted as 3/5ths a person without the knowledge that counting them as a whole would have spelled disaster for the prospects of abolition and civil rights. Therefore, you now have moved the bar of an argument to a compromise where it can be both argued that the South gained power and lost it at the same time. Your first statement on the "3/5ths of a person" was dead wrong and inaccurate and you probably teach this to others as to stoke racial animosity. In any case, I was glad to have brought you back to reality.

Sounds like you are doing a lot of assuming. You assume I'm lamenting something when I am not. You assume that counting them as 1 person would have firmly entrenched slavery. i merely pointed out they were considered 3/5ths of a person to point out the irony that your forefathers that have schools named after them had the nerve to determine someone was only 3/5ths of a person. That was not a noble gesture. Its immoral and goes along with them supporting slavery from the get go when they could have stopped it right there. Thats my proof. Are you denying this? My statement about 3/5ths of a person was correct. Why are you missing that? There was no bar moved expect for you focusing on this 3/5ths thing when the conversation was about who schools were named after. The south did not lose anything when they gained from having Black people count as 3/5ths. The never had it set up for a whole person so what did they lose?

 

[Publius1787]

Your beating a dead end and doing it badly. The south benefited from the 3/5ths compromise. You were wrong in saying they were penalized. They also got the benefit of reduced taxation as well. Why are you bringing Fredrick Douglass into it? You were wrong. Why dont you just admit it?

The above is contradiction, it is not an argument. An argument requires that you cite proof. Besides, you complained that "blacks " (not slaves) were only counted as "3/5ths a person" as if they should have been counted as a whole. You were lamenting that "blacks" (lol not slaves though free blacks could in fact vote) were only counted as 3/5ths a person without the knowledge that counting them as a whole would have spelled disaster for the prospects of abolition and civil rights. Therefore, you now have moved the bar of an argument to a compromise where it can be both argued that the South gained power and lost it at the same time. Your first statement on the "3/5ths of a person" was dead wrong and inaccurate and you probably teach this to others as to stoke racial animosity. In any case, I was glad to have brought you back to reality.

Sounds like you are doing a lot of assuming. You assume I'm lamenting something when I am not. You assume that counting them as 1 person would have firmly entrenched slavery. i merely pointed out they were considered 3/5ths of a person to point out the irony that your forefathers that have schools named after them had the nerve to determine someone was only 3/5ths of a person. That was not a noble gesture. Its immoral and goes along with them supporting slavery from the get go when they could have stopped it right there. Thats my proof. Are you denying this? My statement about 3/5ths of a person was correct. Why are you missing that? There was no bar moved expect for you focusing on this 3/5ths thing when the conversation was about who schools were named after. The south did not lose anything when they gained from having Black people count as 3/5ths. The never had it set up for a whole person so what did they lose?

This statement says it all. It is inaccurate because free blacks were counted as a whole and slaves were counted as 3/5ths of a person strictly for the purposes of congressional enumeration. It begs the question of whether you wished they had been counted as a whole, which in fact, is obviously the case for the below statement. Of course, if they were counted as a whole history would have been bent in favor of the South. The ignorance displayed below was all I needed to demonstrate your omissions of US history as to stoke racial animosity, or perhaps worse, your fundamental misunderstanding of US history. You aren't worth my time if you cant see that the below statement is dead wrong.

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

 

[Asclepias]

The above is contradiction, it is not an argument. An argument requires that you cite proof. Besides, you complained that "blacks " (not slaves) were only counted as "3/5ths a person" as if they should have been counted as a whole. You were lamenting that "blacks" (lol not slaves though free blacks could in fact vote) were only counted as 3/5ths a person without the knowledge that counting them as a whole would have spelled disaster for the prospects of abolition and civil rights. Therefore, you now have moved the bar of an argument to a compromise where it can be both argued that the South gained power and lost it at the same time. Your first statement on the "3/5ths of a person" was dead wrong and inaccurate and you probably teach this to others as to stoke racial animosity. In any case, I was glad to have brought you back to reality.

Sounds like you are doing a lot of assuming. You assume I'm lamenting something when I am not. You assume that counting them as 1 person would have firmly entrenched slavery. i merely pointed out they were considered 3/5ths of a person to point out the irony that your forefathers that have schools named after them had the nerve to determine someone was only 3/5ths of a person. That was not a noble gesture. Its immoral and goes along with them supporting slavery from the get go when they could have stopped it right there. Thats my proof. Are you denying this? My statement about 3/5ths of a person was correct. Why are you missing that? There was no bar moved expect for you focusing on this 3/5ths thing when the conversation was about who schools were named after. The south did not lose anything when they gained from having Black people count as 3/5ths. The never had it set up for a whole person so what did they lose?

This statement says it all. It is inaccurate because free blacks were counted as a whole and slaves were counted as 3/5ths of a person strictly for the purposes of congressional enumeration. It begs the question of whether you wished they had been counted as a whole, which in fact, is obviously the case for the below statement. Of course, if they were counted as a whole history would have been bent in favor of the South. The ignorance displayed below was all I needed to demonstrate your omissions of US history as to stoke racial animosity, or perhaps worse, your fundamental misunderstanding of US history. You aren't worth my time if you cant see that the below statement is dead wrong.

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Now I see your issue with my statement. Instead of Blacks I should have said Black slaves. I was wrong not to include the word in there. My point in saying that was to point out the hypocrisy in the white power establishment a lot of our schools were named after. Instead of focusing on the point, my omission of one word gave you a small window to move the goal posts instead of addressing that point. You are too funny for words.

 

[Publius1787]

Sounds like you are doing a lot of assuming. You assume I'm lamenting something when I am not. You assume that counting them as 1 person would have firmly entrenched slavery. i merely pointed out they were considered 3/5ths of a person to point out the irony that your forefathers that have schools named after them had the nerve to determine someone was only 3/5ths of a person. That was not a noble gesture. Its immoral and goes along with them supporting slavery from the get go when they could have stopped it right there. Thats my proof. Are you denying this? My statement about 3/5ths of a person was correct. Why are you missing that? There was no bar moved expect for you focusing on this 3/5ths thing when the conversation was about who schools were named after. The south did not lose anything when they gained from having Black people count as 3/5ths. The never had it set up for a whole person so what did they lose?

This statement says it all. It is inaccurate because free blacks were counted as a whole and slaves were counted as 3/5ths of a person strictly for the purposes of congressional enumeration. It begs the question of whether you wished they had been counted as a whole, which in fact, is obviously the case for the below statement. Of course, if they were counted as a whole history would have been bent in favor of the South. The ignorance displayed below was all I needed to demonstrate your omissions of US history as to stoke racial animosity, or perhaps worse, your fundamental misunderstanding of US history. You aren't worth my time if you cant see that the below statement is dead wrong.

It seems your argument fails on almost every point. Dont back track and say you didnt say it was wrong. The implication was clear. I didn't say naming schools after Washington or Jefferson was wrong either but is sure provoked you to attempt to defend Jeffersons honor. Unfortunately he still decided to vote against freeing the slaves hypocritically in opposition to the stated goals of the constitution. That seemed counter intuitive to me. Oh I forgot Blacks were only considered 3/5 of a human. Yeah those are some stand up guys right there!

Now I see your issue with my statement. Instead of Blacks I should have said Black slaves. I was wrong not to include the word in there. My point in saying that was to point out the hypocrisy in the white power establishment a lot of our schools were named after. Instead of focusing on the point, my omission of one word gave you a small window to move the goal posts instead of addressing that point. You are too funny for words.

If you use false claims so as to make your point I will show why your claims have no merit. This is a legitimate part of argument. You said that "blacks were only considered 3/5ths of a human." This is wrong on a number of counts and mis-framing and omitting most of my argument is not going to make your case.

1. They were not CONSIDERED as 3/5ths a "HUMAN." They were counted as 3/5ths a person during the census for the purposes of congressional enumeration in the House of Representatives. BIG FREAKING DIFFERENCE!
2. Free blacks, and there were many of them, were counted as a whole. The 3/5ths compromise applied to slaves, not free blacks.
3. You're statement demands that blacks should have been counted as a "whole human" which would have been disastrous for eventual abolition and civil rights.

You are the one complaining that white people are omitting and distorting black history. Yet when it comes to framing falsehoods of black/US history so as to stoke racial animosity in the name of racial solidarity you are guilty as charged. If you can't understand why your statement was a load of crap then you aren't worth anyone's time on historical matters. If your going to criticize someone you should criticize them for legitimate and factual reasons. You do not make up falsehoods so as to dupe and radicalize impressionable young blacks into a black nationalist agenda! Which, of course, is no doubt what you pride yourself in.

On Frederick Douglass and the 3/5ths compromise.