I think there is a hell of a lot of racism in this country towards minorities, particularly blacks and "hispanics". So because of that, yes, I still think it is needed. - - - Updated - - - And this post provides an example as to why AA is still needed.
Not really.. Slavery was originally an economic engine.. but it was on its way out. It was rapidly becoming an economic liability. However, you can always get people jacked up with slogans.
Can't see anything more than a small minority even thinking white men are being punished on one side and a small minority of even thinking they should on the other. I believe that is called racism from either perspective.
You are not aware that slavery cost the USA far more than it paid? That if slaves build something, everyone now benefits from it? I dont really want blacks or anyone else to pay reparations. The need for you to lighten up a little is all that is "proved" here.
I wonder if there is a place you can go if you're white and you never got your 'privilege', like the office for white privilege (OWP) [OWP]"Hello, this is the Office for White Privilege" [White Person] "Hello, I'm white and there's been a mistake I've never recieved my privilege" [OWP] "I'm sorry to hear that. You'll need to fill out form 4070 I'm white and I never recieved my privilege." [White Person] "Thank You" [OWP] "You're welcome."
Surely Obama's kids should get preferential treatment over a white kid who grew up in a trailor on food stamps-right? Surely-right?
not at all. nobody owes anyone today for the past, and nobody alive today is owed anything from anybody. go get your own.
Well it's a matter of practicality, isn't it? Recently the Leftwing of the nation declared all latino population people to be White if they are at least half White by bloodline. So perhaps they will only be fined half as much money from the taxpayer's funds . . . oh wait, there's actually no way to do that, now is there? Hmmm . . . and then we have all those Italians and Irish descended who came over after the Civil War. How do you separate their taxes from those EVIL Whites who lived south of the Mason-Dixon line prior to the Civil War. Then you have all those angelical White descended Yankees who fought for the Union during the Civil War. Then you have those territories that stayed out of the conflict. Should they be fined today because their ancestors some time ago remained neutral? Or should they be exempted because they were not involved one way or the other? The notion of reparations to Blacks for what happened to their distant ancestors is a non-issue since OFFICIALLY this nation tore itself apart and killed many, many citizens in order to redress a wrong. An ocean of blood flowed and the south itself was all but destroyed. That's enough.
Why when black men fought also and they weren't just fighting to stop slavery, also who were those white men fighting against? - - - Updated - - - Why when black men fought also and they weren't just fighting to stop slavery, also who were those white men fighting against? - - - Updated - - - Only a fool would believe that white men haven't been privileged in this country since it was founded.
I just read the dumbest post on PF this week, and that's a pretty good accomplishment. I'm all for making an IQ requirement for using the internet.
In what way did those 2,128,948 white men Union soldiers rape anyone during the Civil War except for some small percentage of them, perhaps, during General Sherman's infamous march southward?
Save the prize for yourself, for taking it literally. You read the flood story as literal too, perhaps?
Should African Americans pay restitution to John Brown's descendants since he gave his life in an attempt to free the slaves?
So, in other words, you believe white men should be punished for what other white men did before they were born-right???
Thats fair, as long as, all the descendants of slave owners, overseers, etc. pay restitution to black folks for slavery.
That's cool all my white descendants came to America after the civil war, and the only slaves they kept were other white europeans and the only slaves my Native American ancestors kept were other Native Americans so I guess I'm good-right??? Does this mean I can't be discriminated against via affirmitive action anymore???
Noooooo . . . but nice try. You see the only thing that would exempt you would be the melanin count of your skin-tone. Are you dark enough so that guilt by skin-color cross contamination cannot have occurred? I know that it seems excessively complex but that's the nature of . . . the race-bigotry and entitlement mentality game. You have to play by their rules . . . or leftwingers will begin to pout.
A new genetic study (Canfield et al. 2013) found that East Asians and Europeans are close genetic cousins, only separated by one genetic mutation that affected a chromosomal region. The mutated segment of DNA was derived from two other mutated segments commonly found in East Asian populations and modern Europeans' genetic ancestry could be traced back to East Asians. The Kalash with blond hair or light eyes, who are residing in the Hindu Kush mountain range between central Afghanistan and northern Pakistan, were thought to have descended from the members of Alexander the Great's army but the Kalash are more likely to be the direct descendants of the proto-European population that had split from East Asians with the A111T mutation than recent European migrants. It's absurd to penalise whites collectively based on their skin colour induced by the genetic mutation and nobody is responsible for what previous generations had done to other groups of people. A Kalash girl in Afghanistan.
