Should Blacks Be Given Their Own Country Inside the US?

Without the blacks, their excessive crime and incarceration, there would be plenty of money for a helping hand, not a generational black hole...

 

But there's no end to their grievances which, in your subjective opinion, are legitimate. They reject the country's founding principles, as well as the people who founded them, as well as the symbol of the country. Those things cannot be changed. Their stated solutions to their problems will invariably harm other groups in the process, so why would we want to do that? They will always have a problem living in this country, so why not give them a fresh start?

 

Plenty of generational welfare in white too. Trailer parks all of the South and Midwest are monuments to it.

- - - Updated - - -

Anyone who has ever waved a Confederate flag or who supports any of the Confederacy's ideals has no business lecturing others about "rejecting the symbol of the country".

 

You left that part out of your argument. Blacks use welfare at a much higher per capita percentage than do whites. Plus, whites politically are amenable to getting rid of the welfare state, blacks are not. That's important.

The Government just nationalized 442,000 square miles of valuable ocean around Hawaii, taking it away from people who were using it. It can be done.

 

Anyone who has ever waved a Confederate flag or who supports any of the Confederacy's ideals has no business lecturing others about "rejecting the symbol of the country".

 

It would look like South Africa in short order.

 

This is actually more in line with black nationalism, which has been seen for decades.

- - - Updated - - -

I think many would be receptive to the idea.

 

Ironically, to a lesser extent it was the question the Nazis faced......taking valuable farmland to build concentration camps.

Of course to the "put the blacks on a reservation/homeland" types, the questions become even MORE monumental than to their ideological ancestors in Deutscheland 1940.

For instance....obviously it would be a FORCED migration. Yet the US military and many urban police forces have large black minority participation. Would the "Black Homeland" types expect those guys to round up other black people to load them on boxcars....

and then be the last guy to jump in before some white soldiers or cops slammed the doors shut?


Seriously, though this sick, twisted little fantasy ...which collapses under scrutiny and logistics....both shows the inherent racism in the idea...and the inherent low intellect of those who support it and actually believe it could be accomplished. Since none of them can answer such obvious and logical questions directly.

 

How many of those people were living on the ocean?

Answer the question: would you, Brewskier the self-avowed White Nationalist, support the government stealing valuable land from whites to build a country for blacks or would want the government to give them some empty worthless land that white people dont want?

 

You seem to be the expert.

Will you please allow us your wisdom by pointing to a successful black ran country?

 

Like I said, I think they should have been allowed to have their own country as well. But why are you deflecting from the topic? As a self-identified libertarian, why would you not allow blacks the opportunity to self-govern in a land that was not forever stained with the lasting history of slavery? Listen to BLM and the Kaepernicks right now talking about how the country is oppressive to "people of color". Why are you forcing them to stay a part of a country that is oppressing them?

 

Of course you should give them the worst, least productive plots of land! LOL!

 

No it's in line with white suprmeacist/separtism/neo-Nazism. It's also a fantasy. Like imagining that "If only Kate Upton met me...she'd fall in love with me and bear my pure Aryan children!"

 

They would surely win Olympic basketball gold!!! LOL

 

I know one where a black guy ran the country and now unemployment is under 5% after a disasterous economy started under a white guy???

 

What reasoning would you have to deny blacks the opportunity to self-govern themselves in a country that was not plagued with oppression, both current and historical? If they despise the country's founding, its Founders, its Constitution, its system of laws, its racial majority, its flag, and wanted to form their own country, why would you oppose that? Be specific, since you're a fan of answering logical questions directly.

 

It's also where the claimed distinction between "White Nationalism" and White Supremacy falls on its face. There is no way to achieve "White Nationalism" without violating the civil liberties of minorities and inevitable use of force.

 

/when

Interesting thought...but then there will need to come a time when the finger pointing stops...Not sure if/when that will ever happen.

 

Because the plan would inevitably involve use of force to violate people's rights.

Their Greivances are legitimate. They should be addressed.

 

Doesn't matter, they used that ocean for their livelihoods, and its now off limits to them. The Government, with a stroke of a pen, took that land away. It could be done again. How do you support one, but not the other?

Yes, I'd support the Government taking land and establishing a country for blacks, if that is what they want. I think it would cure a lot of the problems we are seeing in the US.

- - - Updated - - -

Nope, there are many, many blacks in the current BLM movement that openly reject this country and claim to want a "black world". I don't know about the world, but I think having their very own country here would satisfy many. Why would you not support those people? There's no need for them to stay here plotting the murders of white police officers, wouldn't they be better off governing themselves in true freedom?

 

Without the 'blame game', they lose the emotional security they need when their neighborhoods inevitably collapse or when the gang rivalries happen. They pretty much need to blame Whitey. So it's not really based on the ability to do so, but more on the necessity of doing so.

 

The point is that there will always be grievances--they will never forget slavery or stop holding it against us.

I would (Alabama and Mississippi would be sorely missed). Those white people would be forced to move, if the black people didn't want them there. We would evaluate their property value and pay it off. If you doubt the potential of those states, just imagine what they would be like if they were populated by 40 million Koreans.

It would (*)(*)(*)(*) off a lot of white people in those states, but it would be worth it for everyone involved, in the long run.

Attaching labels that have negative connotations is doing nothing to further the conversation. What are your specific problems with this idea?

I would do it.

 

Equatorial Guinea.

 

Isn't Obama half white?

 

Obama's not Black. His momma is lily white. His father is probably at least half Arab (Arab slave merchant).