No, he's not moving the goal posts. He's simply taking your fundamental premise of EVERYBODY inside the United States with a single drop of any regional European ancestry in his or her veins is guilty of shafting Blacks one way or the other . . . and therefore as a good angst ridden White-devil -- who's terribly contrite over what his EVIL ancestors did -- well . . . the exit to this nation is that-a-way. Problem solved. Next!
How? If it was wrong for your ancestors it must be equally wrong for you. If you still domt get it read Gatewoods post. He's much more eloquent than I.
Ron, I think the point of Egg's post is to highlight the ridiculousness of blaming this generation for our ancestors legacy. This is a mentality which is aggressively cultivated among todays race baiters.
Agreed about race baiters. It's the logic of those seeking "reparations" and those who think whites owe blacks something despite the fact the Civil War ended almost 150 years ago and the CRA of 1964 was passed 50 years ago. Ad to that the fact that over half of the black population was born after the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and it becomes even more puzzling why blacks feel they are owed something. http://blackdemographics.com/population/
good thing I didn't blaim today's generation for our ancestors' legacy. but just as one inherits money, one also inherits debts.
I've gotta ask - when you say this has everything to do with slavery, why aren't you looking back more than a few decades for historical differences between blacks and whites?
nice strawman. I said a lot more than slavery. and when did Segregation finally end? the middle 1970s.
Nice dodge. :/ but really dude, calm down and answer the points made. Neither I nor Ringotuna have a partisan pitbull in this fight, no need to get so defensive. What I said didn't come out right, but if i were to be as much of a grammar Nazi I'd point out that I didn't say "just." You've said multiple times in this thread "we should have given them jobs" or things of that sentiment. So again I ask, where do you get the idea that we denied them jobs? (Hint - after the Civil War Northerners wanted to give them jobs, but former slaves didn't want jobs working for wages)
white employers didn't keep jobs from blacks after the Civil War??? lol!!!! its called Segregation, buddy. white employers didn't hire blacks.
Alright, you've made abundantly clear that you have no legitimate academic interest in this. You can go ahead and maintain that whites didn't hire blacks for over a century after the Civil War, don't bother trying to explain why black and white unemployment rates were basically the same until the mid 1940s, and how that widening in the 1940s is the result of sudden racism, which of course never existed before 1940. http://people.ucsc.edu/~rfairlie/papers/published/ilrr%201999%20-%20racial%20unemployment.pdf http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/08/21/through-good-times-and-bad-black-unemployment-is-consistently-double-that-of-whites/
Cite an example please. Prejudice in this country has a long history. Not just white against black, but vice versa and between other races. I lived in Japan and Okinawa for a year on two 6-month deployments. Japanese are huge racists, but their culture is such they are too polite to call you a Gaijin or "round eye" to your face. Despite the accusations, the white race nor Americans have a monopoly on racism. It not only exists among all races, but among all cultures. Personally, I think there is a genetic component to xenophobia, which is really the basis of racism.
I don't think there is a genetic component to xenophobia or racism. I think human nature is complex. If we look at the root of racism and bigotry in general we can find the reasoning for why some humans (we're not all bigots) tend to discriminate against others based on differences such as race. Let's look at homosexuality for instance. Why do you think that so many people and cultures discriminate against gays? Is it an innate tendency or simply because there is a common perception that homosexuality is unnatural? Ask many people in America and they will tell you it's because the Bible says homosexuality is an abomination and then they will quote you a verse such as Leviticus 18:22. So traditional Christianity teaches that homosexuality is unnatural. But homosexuality is unpopular in many other cultures as well. I personally think the reasoning for this is that most people are straight and perceive homosexuality to be an unappealing practice. There's scientific evidence that there is a genetic component to homosexuality and between consenting adults no one is being harmed. When you ask most people that can't give you any reasoning for why they oppose it beyond thinking it is unappealing and unnatural. I would not consider this aversion to homosexuality to be innate but rather a common cultural development that arose out of the perception of heterosexual people that something must be wrong with homosexuality. The evidence that this opinion is not innate is that there have been different opinions about homosexuality in different cultures (ex. The Greco-Roman world) and opinions on homosexuality in modern society are quickly changing. Now if we look at racism at its root I believe it got started primarily during the age of exploration when Europeans traveled the world and discovered people who looked different than them. These different populations also had different cultures so they began to identify physical characteristics like skin color with culture. Because they had the technology to subdue these different people they began to develop perceptions of them as biologically inferior and when they met with resistance as natural enemies. Eventually as the societies blended together racial caste systems developed which were eventually eradicated when Western society began to consider the moral implications of their racism. Before racism existed ethnocentrism and xenophobia existed for similar reasons. People were different. They either looked different, spoke different languages or practiced different cultures and religions and so people tended to treat each other badly based on these differences. Some times it was deemed necessary because they were in competition with different groups of people. I think we may have tribal instincts that are deeply rooted in our evolutionary history but we're also an altruistic species capable of changing our in-group and out-group categories.
While I think most racism is rooted in self-esteem issues, namely a lack of self-esteem and the need to hate others to feel better about oneself, I disagree about genetics and xenophobia. It's common across all races and cultures. Research confirms it: http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2009/02/090204121504.htm We have an evolved mental readiness to be fearful of certain things in our world. It's known that people are more fearful of "out-groups" -- people who are different from them another link on that same study: http://www.psychologicalscience.org/onlyhuman/2009/01/xenophobia-for-men-only.cfm http://www.sociosite.net/topics/texts/xenophobia.php#adaptive Xenophobia has been experimentally documented in many species of social insects, as well as gulls and some rodents. As a behavior it is reasonably predictable in howler monkeys, gibbons, African lions and timber wolves (referenced in Southwick et al, 1974). A number of studies of non-human primates have shown aggressive intolerance by established groups towards unknown conspecifics. In captive groups xenophobic violence, often deadly, has been documented in baboons (Hall, 1964) and rhesus monkeys (Bernstein, 1964; Bernstein et al, 1974). In the feral situation such behavior has been observed in Japanese macaques (Kawai, 1960) with provisioned populations. Convincingly, Charles Southwick et al (1974) experimentally induced violent xenophobic behavior in unprovisioned wild populations of rhesus in India. Fear of strangers by human infants has been studied showing xenophobic tendencies in children as young as three months (Freedman, 1961). Other studies such as those by Argle and Cook (1976) found that the response of infants was aggravated by strangers that stare. This response did not depend on prior adverse interaction with the strangers thus suggesting an innate component. Eibl-Eibesfeldt (1979) proposed that children have an automatic fear response to others in general that is canceled out by familiarity.
Again I think there may be a genetic component to tribal instincts but we also have the ability to change our in-group and out-group relationships so we're not exactly genetically predisposed to discriminate it's more like we have the ability to distinguish differences and we have an innate fear of differences. There are some articles out there talking about racist babies and how babies react differently to people of different races. I think this observation is merely an example stranger anxiety. It can take many forms. For example look at this video of a baby playing peek-a-boo with her father: [video=youtube;aKVb6LIuJh8]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aKVb6LIuJh8[/video] She's having fun until he shaves his beard. She doesn't recognize him without his beard and becomes instantly fearful. Babies have the ability to distinguish differences like that and its as natural an experiment as you can get. So we do have an innate tendency to be fearful of differences but just like this little girl will get over the change in her father's appearance so to can people overcome irrational fear of differences.
There's no nation of which I'm aware where Blacks have lower anti-social behavior rates than other racial groups. Is every nation with a Black and non-Black population racist? And, if so, does that truly show racism is causative for higher unemployment, lower IQ, higher crime rates, etc.?
I find it truly comical listening to racist who think they are smarter than every black person in America or the world for that fact.
So, you are 400 years old ! Wasn't there a WAR were thousands of whites DIED in order to free the slaves ? How long are you going to whine oh-is-me ? How much long will modern day white male have to be discriminated against to stop all the guilty LIBERALS from crying ? Liberals have created and reinforced perceptions of victimization to satisfy infantile claims of entitlement, indulgence and compensation . Why not have affirmative action and racial quotes in SPORTS ?
Which nation do you have in mind where Blacks are equal or better performing on various positive life achievements?
An interesting area of study, but the xenophobia trait, as studies have shown, have good survival characteristics. While human civilization has been around for a few thousand years, mostly barbarity, human beings have been around for a couple of million years living in tribal groups like baboon troops. While you are correct our reasoning mind can overcome the base instincts of genetic programming, one has to be willing to do it. Look at the male propensity for wanting to screw almost any female. Most married men counter-act that instinct by recognizing the consequences of infidelity, but some men, such as Bill Clinton and Rudy Giuliani, either don't care, are unable or, IMO, think they are entitled to screw whomever they please.
You should lead with your own since you're the one who started this line of argument: As it is, why do we think being "more intelligent" is the epitome of what it means to be a human being? Why isn't compassion, humor or singing ability the most respected quality? As it is, in the USA, intelligence is talked about a lot, but it isn't the most respected quality; playing football well is the most respected quality. Just ask any high schooler.
MOD EDIT>>>FLAME BAIT<<< "Which nation do you have in mind where Blacks are equal or better performing on various positive life achievements?" Certainly we have seen very little even in a wealthy country like the USA where there are 40 Million black people. There is such a paucity of invention that we have this list http://teacher.scholastic.com/activities/bhistory/inventors/ come up at the start of google Lets look at these 10 Great inventors 1) Elijah Mcoy who invented 'an' oil dipping cup. Not THE oil dipping cup but a variation on one. Big wow 2) Lewis Latimer. He didn;t invent the light bulb. he didn;t even work with teh guy who invented the lightbulb (who was Robert Sawn) but he helped make an improvement to the filament for a guy who mane an improved lightbulb (Edison ) Big wow. 3) Ernst Matzeliger is claimed to have made a 'shoemaker' that increased the speed of shoemaking 9X in 1883. Trouble is that such a machine had already been invented 70 years before by Marc Brunel as an automatic nailer. A professional shoe stitcher was already patented in 1864 by Myman Blake's .Matzingers design was a slight variation on Blakes. Big Wow 4)Grenville T woods apparently invent a station to station communication system that lucius ophelps had actually invented 3 years previously 5) george Washington CArver. Bred the modern peanut and invented his butter. Ok one tick. 6) CJ walker. Invented a shampoo. Not Shampoo but 'a' shampoo Big wow 7) garret Morgan invented 'The gas mask' except he didn't. It was Dr Cluny McPherson Otis Boykin he invented a resistor that has proved usefull. Not the resistor but a resistor. Big wow
Please show the post where I claimed that black folks were smarter, more creative and superior to whites. Please post it for all to read. Ask your friend Ray, he is the one claiming that whites are more intelligent than others. Check and see how many of them play college football without having a 2.0 grade average and can score well on a ACT or SAT.
