Advertisement
by Fanosolia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:36 am
by Liberty and Linguistics » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:36 am
Ifreann wrote:Liberty and Linguistics wrote:
Indeed.
Well, sort of. Institutionalized, as opposed to societal, discrimination ended after the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. Granted, blacks still do face discrimination today, but if a black man is called a "nigger" by a random KKK asshole, the natural reaction shouldn't be "BLACK POWER."
Why not?
by Aidannadia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:38 am
by Blakk Metal » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:41 am
by Kelinfort » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:41 am
Aidannadia wrote:This is something that sounds great on the surface but doesn't upon actually looking at definitions and word usage:
pride
prīd/Submit
noun
1.
a feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements, the achievements of those with whom one is closely associated, or from qualities or possessions that are widely admired.
Innate traits are not something to be proud of. They are not achievements or traits/possessions that should be widely admired. They're just... innate traits. That's it.
You can be proud that you are COMFORTABLE with your race I suppose or that you somehow overcame some obstacle that was caused by your race but just being proud because you ARE a race is... wrong by definition.
by Aidannadia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:44 am
Kelinfort wrote:Aidannadia wrote:This is something that sounds great on the surface but doesn't upon actually looking at definitions and word usage:
pride
prīd/Submit
noun
1.
a feeling or deep pleasure or satisfaction derived from one's own achievements, the achievements of those with whom one is closely associated, or from qualities or possessions that are widely admired.
Innate traits are not something to be proud of. They are not achievements or traits/possessions that should be widely admired. They're just... innate traits. That's it.
You can be proud that you are COMFORTABLE with your race I suppose or that you somehow overcame some obstacle that was caused by your race but just being proud because you ARE a race is... wrong by definition.
While I agree, I should point out a lot of people are proud of attributes they have.
by Fanosolia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:44 am
Liberty and Linguistics wrote:Kelinfort wrote:White pride makes as little sense as black pride.
But at least black pride can root itself in systemic discrimination.
Indeed.
Well, sort of. Institutionalized, as opposed to societal, discrimination ended after the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. Granted, blacks still do face discrimination today, but if a black man is called a "nigger" by a random KKK asshole, the natural reaction shouldn't be "BLACK POWER."
by Liberty and Linguistics » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:46 am
Fanosolia wrote:Liberty and Linguistics wrote:
Indeed.
Well, sort of. Institutionalized, as opposed to societal, discrimination ended after the Civil Rights Movement of the 1960s. Granted, blacks still do face discrimination today, but if a black man is called a "nigger" by a random KKK asshole, the natural reaction shouldn't be "BLACK POWER."
When you say that do you mean discrimination rules and laws that say a store or a governmental service must a bid by, as opposed say the biases of a person?
by Ifreann » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:47 am
by Bari » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:50 am
Liberty and Linguistics wrote:Fanosolia wrote:
When you say that do you mean discrimination rules and laws that say a store or a governmental service must a bid by, as opposed say the biases of a person?
Sort of. Institutionalized racism refers to government sanctioned racism, such as segregation, or not allowing blacks to vote, etc. Societal discrimination refers to some inbred man from West Virginia putting a sign on his truck that says "fuck dem negroes."
by MERIZoC » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:51 am
Liberty and Linguistics wrote:Fanosolia wrote:
When you say that do you mean discrimination rules and laws that say a store or a governmental service must a bid by, as opposed say the biases of a person?
Sort of. Institutionalized racism refers to government sanctioned racism, such as segregation, or not allowing blacks to vote, etc. Societal discrimination refers to some inbred man from West Virginia putting a sign on his truck that says "fuck dem negroes."
by Liberty and Linguistics » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:53 am
by New Skaaneland » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:53 am
Undo the Taylor report!
OOOOO HELSINGBORGS IF OOOOO
by Liberty and Linguistics » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:54 am
Bari wrote:Liberty and Linguistics wrote:
Sort of. Institutionalized racism refers to government sanctioned racism, such as segregation, or not allowing blacks to vote, etc. Societal discrimination refers to some inbred man from West Virginia putting a sign on his truck that says "fuck dem negroes."
Have you ever encountered an inbred man from West Virginia with such a sign on his truck?
by New Waterford » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:54 am
by Liberty and Linguistics » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:55 am
Merizoc wrote:Liberty and Linguistics wrote:
Sort of. Institutionalized racism refers to government sanctioned racism, such as segregation, or not allowing blacks to vote, etc. Societal discrimination refers to some inbred man from West Virginia putting a sign on his truck that says "fuck dem negroes."
No. Institutionalized racism does not require explicit legislation. Racial profiling, unequal opportunity, and unequal drug laws all contribute to the current system of institutionalized racism.
by Fanosolia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:55 am
Liberty and Linguistics wrote:Fanosolia wrote:
When you say that do you mean discrimination rules and laws that say a store or a governmental service must a bid by, as opposed say the biases of a person?
Sort of. Institutionalized racism refers to government sanctioned racism, such as segregation, or not allowing blacks to vote, etc. Societal discrimination refers to some inbred man from West Virginia putting a sign on his truck that says "fuck dem negroes."
by Ifreann » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:55 am
Let's address this beautiful double standard of yours, shall we, because you basically just condoned black power.
by Aidannadia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:55 am
by Bezombia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:57 am
Ifreann wrote:Not right now, but did you ever hear the one about the man who walked into a bar with a giraffe?
Sauritican wrote:We've all been spending too much time with Ben
Verdum wrote:Hey girl, is your name Karl Marx? Because your starting an uprising in my lower classes.
Black Hand wrote:New plan is to just make thousands of disposable firearms and dump them out of cargo planes with tiny drag chutes attached.
Spreewerke wrote:The metric system is the only measurement system that truly meters.
Fordorsia wrote:mfw Beano is my dad http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FSWiMoO8zNE
Spreewerke wrote:Salt the women, rape the earth.
Equestican wrote:Ben is love, Ben is life.
Sediczja wrote:real eyes realize real lies
by MERIZoC » Wed Jul 08, 2015 9:57 am
Liberty and Linguistics wrote:Ifreann wrote:No, let's not, because what I would do in the reverse situation you went on to describe does not answer my question to you.
You're joking. You have to be joking. Let's address this beautiful double standard of yours, shall we, because you basically just condoned black power.
When I say "if a man calls a black man something insulting, then the natural reaction shouldn't be black power" you responded with "why not?"
When I said "if a black man calls a white man something insulting, then the natural reaction shouldn't be white power" you responded with a cop out response.
What the hell? Be honest, do you condone black pride/black power? With that logic, do you condone white pride/white power?
by Bari » Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:00 am
Ifreann wrote:Liberty and Linguistics wrote:
You're joking. You have to be joking.
Not right now, but did you ever hear the one about the man who walked into a bar with a giraffe?Let's address this beautiful double standard of yours, shall we, because you basically just condoned black power.
I would need to have a double standard for us to address any such thing. How about instead you answer my question instead of asking what I'd do in different situations than the one you describe.
by Aidannadia » Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:00 am
Merizoc wrote:Black pride isn't about being proud of having dark skin. It's about being proud to identify with those who face(d) that aforementioned abuse. It's about taking pride in standing up to protect a cultural heritage under attack.
by MERIZoC » Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:01 am
Liberty and Linguistics wrote:Merizoc wrote:No. Institutionalized racism does not require explicit legislation. Racial profiling, unequal opportunity, and unequal drug laws all contribute to the current system of institutionalized racism.
Unequal opportunity? Blacks are given affirmative action and equal economic rights. They have the opportunity, and they're moving up.
by Washington Resistance Army » Wed Jul 08, 2015 10:01 am
Merizoc wrote:One has roots in the backlash against widespread abuse and discrimination. The other has roots in the facilitation of widespread abuse and discrimination. Reflect on that for a second.
Black pride isn't about being proud of having dark skin. It's about being proud to identify with those who face(d) that aforementioned abuse. It's about taking pride in standing up to protect a cultural heritage under attack. White pride is about how all the darkies should be picking our cotton.
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], Emotional Support Crocodile, Google [Bot], Port Carverton, Simonia
Advertisement