Catholic high school students Mock Native American elder

So was Nathan Phillips and the Black Israelite's but the March for Life was over and they were sightseeing. Both the Black Israelite's and Nathan Phillips politicized the kids being there.

 

More cartoons. Let me guess - you've identified these people as most likely racists ??

 

And attempted to cause a violent reaction from the kids via obscenities and confrontation that did not work.

 

Maybe the tribes of the Northwest treat their people differently than do the Seminoles.

 

An interesting post, from one of the better-informed liberals here. It seems congruent with my own prejudices, which are these: In fact, neither Black racism towards whites, nor white racism towards Blacks, has much impact today. The problems of whites are not caused by Blacks, nor vice versa.

But ... I think that 'the Left' actually have a point, regarding the 'racism' of different racial groups. (Of course, the radical Left mis-use the term, and in fact whenever one reads the word 'racism', it's usually in a context that obscures reality.)

Anyway, here's what this conservative believes: every tribal group -- I use the word 'tribal' rather than 'racial' as it encompasses broader identity-groups than 'race', which is a problematic term anyway, being a social construct on top of a biological reality -- thinks of itself as 'normal', and other tribal groups as somehow a bit strange or unusual.

Anyone who knows anything about history knows that this attitude has frequently led to violence between tribal groups. This is true even when they are of the same 'race' -- no 'race' has committed more horrible acts of murder against other tribes of the same race than whites have -- not to mention their crimes against other races. Human beings migrate/invade/conquer/flee to find more congenial circumstances. Most modern states have formed in such a way as to include more than one tribal group within their boundaries. Or, they have invited/allowed different tribal groups to migrate into their boundaries.

When you have more than one tribal group living inside a single state, you have the potential for conflict, which can turn deadly.

Intra-white tribalist murder has been frequent. Most recently -- and on-going -- the former Yugoslavia. They're all white and most of them are some type of Christian, but ... if you want to turn your stomach, read about what Catholic Christian white Croats did to Orthodox Christian white Serbs, and what the latter did to the nominally-Muslim 'Bosniaks'. (During the Second World War, the Croats did things that made even the Germans sick.)

Northern Ireland is waiting to start up again.

We'll probably hear about atrocities against the enclaves of Poles and Hungarians and Czecks and Ukrainians caught outside 'their own' states soon. The Germans certainly dished it out against other whites -- not just Jews -- and were the victims of retaliation by their former victims after WWII. (I mean rape and murder, not just being driven from their ancestral homes.)

These tribal groups certainly did not love each other. Poles hated Ukrainians and vice versa, and on and on. And when one group hates another, they usually evolve some sort of explanation for why the other group deserves to be hated, some innate characteristic that the hated group has: they're inherently untrustworthy, or violent, or sneaky. People don't like to think that it's just a struggle over scarce resources.

Notice I've only mentioned white people and their intra-race hatreds and persecutions. The list could be extended greatly if we include the hatred and violence among African tribal groups, Muslim religious sects, Tamils and Sinhalese, Japanese and Koreans .... it's a human universal.

Thus "racism".

And of course if you're in the minority group, you will return the favor. Everyone living in a multi-tribal situation will be a "racist". (Except, of course, the person writing this, and the person reading this. We rise above such things.)

But ... not all "racisms" are equal in their effect: there is very often a power-difference between two contending tribal groups. One may be the majority in a country, and have the power of the state at its command. So it can cause its racism to have an effect on the other group, which the other group cannot counter -- even if both groups hate each other equally.

In the US, whites have most of the power. In the past, this power was often unrestrained by the normal conventions of civilization.

In other words, white racism towards Blacks, historically, has been about a billion times worse in its effects, than Black racism towards whites.

If you don't understand and acknowledge this reality, you will not be able to understand American politics today.

This does NOT necessarily mean that one racism is 'justified'. ('Explainable', 'understandable' in a technical sense, yes. Everything has an explanation.)

It does NOT mean, necessarily, that Black problems today are caused by current white racism. It does NOT necessarily mean that Black problems are caused by past white racism. These are two arguable positions -- either or both may be true, or partially true, or they may be false, or irrelevant. But they are logically independent of an understanding of the real difference between the racism of a dominant group, and the racism of a subordinate group.

Let's put it in the sharpest way possible: a Black man with a lynch-mob's rope around his neck, standing on a pile of wood about to be set alight, may well have hated all white people. The grinning mob of whites around him may well have hated all Black people. Both were 'racists'.

But their racism was not 'equal'.

 

Also you can only imagine the breath of the drum beater shouting insults is some other language at the young men.

 

Rather in the way flags can be inflammatory. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and so are other judgments.

What should a person expect when flying the Confederate flag in certain locations? It's the hats only because of what and who they are symbols of.

 

Actually you are because you pre judged these white kids before knowing the facts because you assumed they must have been racists based on their race. You also haven't acknowledged the racism and lies the old man told about the kids, what they said and what they actually did. It wasn't just the Israelites who were racist and liars.

 

Agreed. It's no coincidence that these groups were in DC at the same time the March for Life took place. The chaperons should have immediately called for police intervention.

 

The hats were not worn by confederate soldiers in the Civil War. Your argument is against the first amendment which is under attack more now than it's ever been.

 

Well spank me on Sunday your honor. It is an honor to be posting with such a perfect human being as yourself.

Can you point out where I assumed they were racists? I said they looked like bigots because the hats most of them were wearing are the symbols of a bigot who happens to be POTUS.

 

A probe ain't gonna' work either.

Absolutely. People are allowed to say whatever they want. But it may be best to not wander off at the last second and drag some individuals into the national spotlight with false accusations and make a total fool of yourself in the process.

May I suggest you prepare yourself for a third appointee to the SC in the next two years. You are not going to like that one even more.

 

You are grossly inaccurate sir, and I question your reading comprehension.

I did not say the hats were worn by confederate soldiers. I referenced a confederate flag, not confederate hats.

Your claim that my argument is against the First Amendment is so much bullshit, and a sign of desperation.

 

Right you are. Now ask me if I give a damn who gets appointed to SCOTUS, or if I have any illusions that my thoughts or wishes will be considered.

 

The hats aren't Confederate flags.

What is inflammatory about what or who the hats are a symbol of?

Do you think it's right that morons are propagandized into getting triggered by an innocuous article of clothing?

 

I think its much simpler. The left literally hates Trump and anyone who supports him.

 

"I said they looked like bigots because the hats most of them were wearing are the symbols of a bigot who happens to be POTUS."

Flawed premise.

 

It's simpler than that.

The left hates.

 

I think it's wrong, but not surprising, that morons are triggered and encouraged by presidential candidates to assault others that they don't agree with. I think it's wrong for presidential candidates to encourage bigotry and violent behavior, but that's what happened in the last campaign.

Bigots encourage bigotry, and that's what DJT has done.

 

It absolutely is a First Ammendment issue. There is no excuse for adults to attack kids over benign articles of clothing.

 

Flawed thinking and behavior when POTUS encourages bigotry and violence. Encouraging mob behavior is not good for a country, and we're seeing the effects of it.

 

If we were like the left, anyone wearing a "**** Trump" shirt would be left dead and littering the sides of the road.

 

My argument is completely accurate. The kids were attacked for wearing red baseball caps with ‘Make America Great Again’ stitched on them. They were exercising there first amendment rights and were attacked by activists using the most foul language possible.

 

But the only people being bigots are the Black Nationalist and the leftist activist. The Catholic school children, and in particular the one wearing the MAGA hat, are the innocent well behaved victims.

Leftist dislike for a President doesn't give you the right to yell racist comments, and get in people's faces...it's uncivil...it's frankly the behavior of terrorist.

 

There it is right there.

Get people to hate and you have an easily manipulated mob of non-thinkers.