If I support Trump, am I a closet Racist?

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

You know, this your first argument where I feel you did a decent job, ill give you that. Your point on the wage gap is actually true after looking into it more, even though there IS still a gap, its not as prominent as I initially thought. This does not deny the fact that throughout history up till recently, men have been given promotions over women although they are equally as qualified. Which brings me back to the point on equal opportunity: You think that it is "nonsense", yet you admit that it is true and say that the government shouldn't intervene. Again, I think you see your superior position and want to stay at the top. I don't understand why else you wouldn't want equal opportunity? And I know you're smart enough to know this: if you take a company to court for discrimination you will need a plethora of evidence and be prepared to fight these top lawyers which is an expensive process. Plus why change one company when you can just advocate for equality to all companies. Make it a norm in business environments.

"This does not deny the fact that throughout history..." Again, I shouldn't have to post this as it is so blatantly obvious, but no amount of legislation will ever change the past. Justice is supposed to be blind, not wielded for revenge.

There is no absence of opportunity; no law defining which jobs women can or cannot take, no law stating how much women can make or that they can only make a certain percentage of what men make or that men must make a certain percentage more than women... Men and women are on a equal footing.

Listen closely, this is where we have a miscommunication. Do you understand what activists do? Going back to your initial claim: you believe that Black lives matter is a racist group and feminists are a sexist group. Feminists support a greater cause than just the wage gap which you claim to be not a big issue, fine. How about rape? Many people still don't know that men can even be raped. Tell me rape isn't a big deal and is a cause to stand for. Are they sexist for trying to effectively end rape against women? How about objectifying women? How often do you hear about men being objectified compared to women? How about human trafficking? "According to a new report from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC), the vast majority of all human trafficking victims – some 71 per cent – are women and girls and one third are children." [1] How about sexual assault? Now, how about the things you cant see: society's image for how women should be like (men face this too but in a different but probably equally as negative way). Do you think all these issues I stated above is not enough to stand up for and try to fix?

...so feminists wouldn't possibly tolerate a woman who sexually abused a teenager and paid him large a settlement. Well whatdoyaknow, not only do feminists tolerate just such a rapist, they follow her as an outspoken member of the #metoo movement. No surprise really, that has been the history of feminism. When serial philanderer and accused rapist Bill Clinton was running for president in 92 and 96, the feminists were out in force propping him up.

"The activists are exacerbating the problems. Most glaring are the problems of the black community." Where is the evidence for this? Who is being affected by these activists?

Already answered, read the quote in my last post.

"Once again, explain to me the necessity of reparations." I'm not sure if you have ever taken a history class in your life - and if you have - I wonder if you have studied any other race apart from your own. It is a fact that the African American people struggle. Until you are walking on the streets and get stopped by the police for no reason, you will never truly understand because you do lack any sense of empathy. Until you are raped or bounded by society you will never understand what women go through.

Wow, what a way to ignore the question. Black people struggle, white people struggle, Asian people struggle, men struggle, women struggle... I guess that means reparations for all!! even thought that isn't remotely the meaning of reparations.

You may actually be right when you say I have white guilt, but I at least have a heart. You are heartless, and filled with entitlement and think about nothing other than yourself and self profit. I am about the well-being for all and not just myself and people the who are like me.

I prefer logic and rationality to unbridled emotion, it keeps me from making erroneous and fanciful assumptions of other people's motivations. My only interest is in equal justice and equality of opportunity, the founding principles of our nation. Catering to the whims of protected classes is a recipe for disaster.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

"no amount of legislation will ever change the past" I completely agree with you, in fact nothing can change the past unless time machines do exist. But I nor activists are trying to change the past. We are trying to repair our society now and for the future. The reason I am using past statistics and facts is to prove that for centuries this discrimination and inequality has been occurring. Once again you bring up this fear you have that we are seeking justice by taking advantage or looking for "revenge". I don't know how many times I have to say that is not the objective. The objective is to seek EQUALITY not SUPERIORITY.

"There is no absence of opportunity; no law defining which jobs women can or cannot take, no law stating how much women can make or that they can only make a certain percentage of what men make or that men must make a certain percentage more than women... Men and women are on a equal footing." You do not understand that humans do not follow the law like a robot. Even governments break the law, that does not mean that laws are everything. If everybody does not comply or agree with the law, they can easily use loopholes to go around it. Yes, the wealth disparity between men and women are becoming increasingly inapparent, but this is not the only issue women face.

"...so feminists wouldn't possibly tolerate a woman who sexually abused a teenager and paid him large a settlement. Well whatdoyaknow, not only do feminists tolerate just such a rapist, they follow her as an outspoken member of the #metoo movement. No surprise really, that has been the history of feminism. When serial philanderer and accused rapist Bill Clinton was running for president in 92 and 96, the feminists were out in force propping him up. " Wow, play the victim card. Feminists understand that women are the sexual abuser, but this is so rare. There are still people who do not believe men can be raped or sexualized. We do not deny the fact that it is happening at all, but nobody is stoping men from creating their own #MeToo movement. If you are so deeply affected by it then you start a movement, simple. Stand up for what you believe in.

"Wow, what a way to ignore the question. Black people struggle, white people struggle, Asian people struggle, men struggle, women struggle... I guess that means reparations for all!! even thought that isn't remotely the meaning of reparations." Victim card again here. The point isn't who struggles. Tell me how many white men were unlawfully stoped by police? How many unarmed men were shot and killed last year? How many African American? I bet you have never heard of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, or Eric Garner. Watch this video and tell me how many white folks deal with issues like this?

I am not saying it does not happen but look at the disparity. Black people are 3x more likely to be killed by the police. 30% of black victims who were killed in 2015 were UNARMED. Fewer than 1/3rd of black people killed in 2014 were suspected of a crime. Cities with higher crime rates do not make it more likely to be black and be killed by the police. 99% of cases have not resulted in the officers being convicted. Now, after seeing all these statistics, tell me that white people face the same issues and to this magnitude. Black people are being stripped of their freedom and even right to live.

"I prefer logic and rationality to unbridled emotion, it keeps me from making erroneous and fanciful assumptions of other people's motivations. My only interest is in equal justice and equality of opportunity, the founding principles of our nation. Catering to the whims of protected classes is a recipe for disaster." That is your opinion, and respect that, however you are generalizing. The topic of this debate is "if i support trump am i a closet racist". I voted no. On god the majority of trump supporters I have personally met, unfortunately, are racist. Many are in my extended family in fact. This does not give me the right to say all trump supporters are racist. You are making an absurd statement by calling feminists sexist and the black lives matter movement racist. They are standing for something you believe in, yet you disvalue their movement?? You are just contradicting yourself.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

I completely agree with you, in fact nothing can change the past unless time machines do exist. But I nor activists are trying to change the past. We are trying to repair our society now and for the future. The reason I am using past statistics and facts is to prove that for centuries this discrimination and inequality has been occurring. Once again you bring up this fear you have that we are seeking justice by taking advantage or looking for "revenge". I don't know how many times I have to say that is not the objective. The objective is to seek EQUALITY not SUPERIORITY.

Of course you're trying to use the past to justify current victimhood status, why else would you bother to bring it up? If you want to prove discrimination, quote current discriminatory laws. Your objective, as I've maintained all along is equality of outcome, to which NO ONE is entitled.

You do not understand that humans do not follow the law like a robot. Even governments break the law, that does not mean that laws are everything. If everybody does not comply or agree with the law, they can easily use loopholes to go around it. Yes, the wealth disparity between men and women are becoming increasingly inapparent, but this is not the only issue women face.

...and again you prove you think you're entitled to equality of outcome. That is NOT the role of our government. The last thing the government should be doing is picking winners and losers. If there are actual loopholes based on race, sex, etc., feel free to share them. The only ones I know of are the quotas set up by Affirmative Action, which should be abolished.

Wow, play the victim card. Feminists understand that women are the sexual abuser, but this is so rare. There are still people who do not believe men can be raped or sexualized. We do not deny the fact that it is happening at all, but nobody is stoping men from creating their own #MeToo movement. If you are so deeply affected by it then you start a movement, simple. Stand up for what you believe in.

...the victim card?!? That is the basis for YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT. Women are victims; blacks are victims; EVERYBODY is a victim, everybody except white, heterosexual, Christian, males; but they're a minority who's membership is dwindling, so they deserve to be protected like every other minority, right?

I do stand up for what I believe in, which is equal opportunity under the law. That's why I cannot support Black Lives Matter or feminism or the promotion of any other protected class.

Victim card again here. The point isn't who struggles. Tell me how many white men were unlawfully stoped by police? How many unarmed men were shot and killed last year? How many African American? I bet you have never heard of Trayvon Martin, Michael Brown, or Eric Garner. Watch this video and tell me how many white folks deal with issues like this?
I am not saying it does not happen but look at the disparity. Black people are 3x more likely to be killed by the police. 30% of black victims who were killed in 2015 were UNARMED. Fewer than 1/3rd of black people killed in 2014 were suspected of a crime. Cities with higher crime rates do not make it more likely to be black and be killed by the police. 99% of cases have not resulted in the officers being convicted. Now, after seeing all these statistics, tell me that white people face the same issues and to this magnitude. Black people are being stripped of their freedom and even right to live.

There would be no Black Lives Matter without the victim card.

Trayvon Martin?!? I thought you were talking about how blacks are treated by cops; which, it turns out, is about the same as they treat whites.

Produced every three years by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics, the survey asks more than 60,000 people about their interactions with the police. It asks respondents' to provide age, race and gender. It asks them whether they had any contact with the police in the last year; what was the experience like; how were your treated; was there a use of force and so on. Turns out, according to a September 2017 National Review article, black men and white men are about equally likely to have a contact with a cop in a given year. As to multiple contacts, defined as three or more with the police in a given year, 1.5 percent of blacks vs. 1.2 percent of whites fall in that category. Not much difference.

https://townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/2018/06/28/criminal-behavior-not-racism-explains-racial-disparities-in-crime-stats-n2495148

Uh-oh;

The BJS study also found that black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at.

Participants in an innovative Washington State University study of deadly force were more likely to feel threatened in scenarios involving black people. But when it came time to shoot, participants were biased in favor of black suspects, taking longer to pull the trigger against them than against armed white or Hispanic suspects...

[WSU researcher Lois] James’ study is a follow-up to one in which she found active police officers, military personnel and the general public took longer to shoot black suspects than white or Hispanic suspects. Participants were also more likely to shoot unarmed white suspects than black or Hispanic ones and more likely to fail to fire at armed black suspects.

“In other words,” wrote James and her co-authors, “there was significant bias favoring blacks where decisions to shoot were concerned.”

When confronted by an armed white person, participants took an average of 1.37 seconds to fire back. Confronted by an armed black person, they took 1.61 seconds to fire and were less likely to fire in error. The 240-millisecond* difference may seem small, but it’s enough to be fatal in a shooting.

https://reason.com/blog/2014/09/03/study-people-more-likely-to-shoot-white

Image: https://www.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/ug/kfk0gqljdjz7.jpg

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2016/07/18/analysis-of-washington-post-police-shootings-data-reveals-surprising-result/

Another talking point that can't stand up to reality.

That is your opinion, and respect that, however you are generalizing. The topic of this debate is "if i support trump am i a closet racist". I voted no. On god the majority of trump supporters I have personally met, unfortunately, are racist. Many are in my extended family in fact. This does not give me the right to say all trump supporters are racist. You are making an absurd statement by calling feminists sexist and the black lives matter movement racist. They are standing for something you believe in, yet you disvalue their movement?? You are just contradicting yourself.

I'm not making any generalizations and I certainly don't share the goals of Black Lives Matter or feminism. I support equal opportunity and equality under the law. By your own admission, Black Lives Matter seeks preferential treatment to atone for grievances of by-gone days. Likewise feminism. That is what makes Black Lives Matter racist and feminism sexist. As, I have consistently said, equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome.

beckysmith · Screenshot 2018-09-09 10.52.54.png 50.2K

CYDdharta said:

Of course you're trying to use the past to justify current victimhood status, why else would you bother to bring it up? If you want to prove discrimination, quote current discriminatory laws. Your objective, as I've maintained all along is equality of outcome, to which NO ONE is entitled. ...and again you prove you think you're entitled to equality of outcome. That is NOT the role of our government. The last thing the government should be doing is picking winners and losers. If there are actual loopholes based on race, sex, etc., feel free to share them. The only ones I know of are the quotas set up by Affirmative Action, which should be abolished.
First of all, I would disagree. You think it is not the role of our government to support equality and freedom for all? Explain to me what is the role of our government then? Speaking of, trump is doing an excellent job and creating wars between each other in America. Again you have to be in the shoes of those affected to understand. You are entitled. If your biggest issue is government intervening, fine. Black lives matter and feminists also attempt to educate people like you who don't believe that their is an inequality.

"...the victim card?!? That is the basis for YOUR ENTIRE ARGUMENT. Women are victims; blacks are victims; EVERYBODY is a victim, everybody except white, heterosexual, Christian, males; but they're a minority who's membership is dwindling, so they deserve to be protected like every other minority, right?

I do stand up for what I believe in, which is equal opportunity under the law. That's why I cannot support Black Lives Matter or feminism or the promotion of any other protected class." I'm not even going to comment on that, that is your opinion.

"I thought you were talking about how blacks are treated by cops; which, it turns out, is about the same as they treat whites" Another talking point that can't stand up to reality. This is where your ignorance shows a flaw in every argument you have put up so far. People like you use rhetoric in an attempt to defend your side but it will not work. Look at the numbers. There are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. And if you know anything about percentages you will see a difference. White people make up roughly 62 % of the U.S. population while African American people make up about 13 %. U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer in 2015. It is important that the news sites you use are unbiased because they contain rhetoric in an attempt to filter the reality that you see. I'm beginning to think you're just a white supremacist.

https://townhall.com/columnists/larryelder/2018/06/28/criminal-behavior-not-racism-explains-racial-disparities-in-crime-stats-n2495148"Uh-oh;"
Come back to me when you can use an unbiased source which is not filled with rhetoric. And just a word of advice, don't believe every single thing you hear on the internet.

Look, since you like "logic and rational" thinking, you would know that equal opportunity does not equal equal outcome. For example, Africa is the richest continent on planet earth, yet they have the poorest economy in the world because of past AND current struggles. They will stay this way without outside investment which is "unequal opportunity" per say. Another example, if you commit a fraud (penalty) in ANY sport in existence explain to me why they are penalized. It is to make the game FAIR and EQUAL. You are contradicting yet again. You cannot support equality yet beg to stay superior by not allowing equality.

George_Horse

beckysmith said:

George_Horse said:

beckysmith said:

George_Horse said:

It would seem that there is some material in your eyes, try and clean your eyes. Or maybe it is not your eyes being unclean, but your vision. Did you have some difficulty understanding my previous post? The images were SAMPLES of how you should link your claims, I'm not talking about guns, I used the images as examples of how you should source your claims, simple as that. Now that you again claim that Donald Trump attacked Lebron for building a school, please source (ACTUALLY LINK YOUR CLAIM) your claim, like this: "Donald Trump attacked lebron." [3]. I will wait for you now, don't get me mad please.

LOL first of all, relax . See, if you would watch other news sources other than just fox news, then you'd see the other side of trump. It was all over the news of what Trump said about Lebron, and if you would "clean your eyes" also, you would see that I posted a screenshot of the tweet that Trump posted. I'm not sure which source you trump supporters find not to be "fake news" so here are multiple sources to actually link my claim:
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-attacks-lebron-james-intelligence-mike/story?id=57027959
https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trump-attacks-lebron-james-intelligence-mike/story?id=57027959
https://www.vox.com/2018/8/4/17650982/trump-lebron-james-tweet-don-lemon
https://consequenceofsound.net/2018/08/donald-trump-lebron-james/
http://fortune.com/2018/08/04/trump-lebron-james-tweet/

You really think Lebron doesn't "f*ck with white people"? A lot of his teammates who he calls his family are white. That source you attached does not exist by the way. Also, you personally think he is unintelligent?? What shows that. And im fine with putting my tax paying money towards education 100%. Education arguably the single most important thing anyone can invest in. Ask any economist, qualified politician, or large business owner they will tell you thats a fact.

And that tweet clearly shows trump calling Lebron dumb. Don't say it was only criticizing Don Lemon. Honestly, if you think Lebron James is a bad person, you might as well hate every NBA player as well. He for a fact is one of the most respected athletes to have ever lived. Not just for his athletic ability but also for the things he does off the court. In all honestly, you are the first person i've ever heard say that Lebron is a bad person. Going back to where he "disrespected" the fan wearing a MAGA hat. I can't help but laugh at that. Where in that video was the fan disrespect? Lebron was simply throwing his shirt to the side and made eye contact with the fan. At most he saw the MAGA hat and gave him a bad look. How is that disrespecting? Don't be so sensitive lol. You cannot justify Trumps actions by saying Lebron is a bad person. Anybody will tell you that is not true. Maybe he offends people by saying some things like "uneducated people vote for trump" which I can admit is a bit offensive, but he is in no way a bad person.

Time for me to get back on after my break. So here's my new argument.

"You really think Lebron doesn't "f*ck with white people"? A lot of his teammates who he calls his family are white. That source you attached does not exist by the way."

I edited it, so it should work.

Also, you personally think he is unintelligent??"

When you sit there and think Hillary being the best idea for president and thinking she should have REALLY won, it screams "unintelligent".

"And that tweet clearly shows trump calling Lebron dumb."

How? In what

"At most he saw the MAGA hat and gave him a bad look. How is that disrespecting?"

It is not respectful to give someone a bad look, its negative expression of not liking that person. It was as if he pretended like he was not even there and did not DARE to look at one of his fans, basically he was shunning him.

"You cannot justify Trumps actions by saying Lebron is a bad person."

I'm not justifying Trump's actions, I'm making it clear that he was not talking about Lebron, but Don Lemon, how difficult is it to comprehend?

beckysmith

George_Horse said:

Time for me to get back on after my break. So here's my new argument.

"You really think Lebron doesn't "f*ck with white people"? A lot of his teammates who he calls his family are white. That source you attached does not exist by the way."

I edited it, so it should work.

Also, you personally think he is unintelligent??"

When you sit there and think Hillary being the best idea for president and thinking she should have REALLY won, it screams "unintelligent".

"And that tweet clearly shows trump calling Lebron dumb."

How? In what

"At most he saw the MAGA hat and gave him a bad look. How is that disrespecting?"

It is not respectful to give someone a bad look, its negative expression of not liking that person. It was as if he pretended like he was not even there and did not DARE to look at one of his fans, basically he was shunning him.

"You cannot justify Trumps actions by saying Lebron is a bad person."

I'm not justifying Trump's actions, I'm making it clear that he was not talking about Lebron, but Don Lemon, how difficult is it to comprehend?

"I edited it, so it should work." ok... still defends my point

"When you sit there and think Hillary being the best idea for president and thinking she should have REALLY won, it screams "unintelligent" So just because he is sharing his opinion, this screams unintelligent? Well I learned something new today.

"How? In what" Trump says that the interviewee made Lebron sound smart which isn't easy to do. Do you understand what he is implying? I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

"It is not respectful to give someone a bad look, its negative expression of not liking that person. It was as if he pretended like he was not even there and did not DARE to look at one of his fans, basically he was shunning him." Fine, lets say it was disrespectful. Have you ever gave somebody who you disagree a bad look? That does not make him a bad person for doing that. Anyone who knows Lebron also knows his strong political views and his opinion on the president. And I don't blame Lebron for thinking so. Trump has publicly attacked Lebron and his friends twice and Trump is very controversial towards African Americans. Why should Lebron be happy to see a supporter of Trump? The bottom line is, giving one person a bad look should not reflect on your personality as being a bad person.. The impact Lebron James has had on so many lives, outweighs this dirty look.

"I'm not justifying Trump's actions, I'm making it clear that he was not talking about Lebron, but Don Lemon, how difficult is it to comprehend?" Fair enough. Maybe I and Lebron himself are interpreting it in a different way than you. I also think the timing of this tweet was also pretty bad as it was right after Lebron built an affordable school for children.

George_Horse

beckysmith said:

George_Horse said:

Time for me to get back on after my break. So here's my new argument.

"You really think Lebron doesn't "f*ck with white people"? A lot of his teammates who he calls his family are white. That source you attached does not exist by the way."

I edited it, so it should work.

Also, you personally think he is unintelligent??"

When you sit there and think Hillary being the best idea for president and thinking she should have REALLY won, it screams "unintelligent".

"And that tweet clearly shows trump calling Lebron dumb."

How? In what

"At most he saw the MAGA hat and gave him a bad look. How is that disrespecting?"

It is not respectful to give someone a bad look, its negative expression of not liking that person. It was as if he pretended like he was not even there and did not DARE to look at one of his fans, basically he was shunning him.

"You cannot justify Trumps actions by saying Lebron is a bad person."

I'm not justifying Trump's actions, I'm making it clear that he was not talking about Lebron, but Don Lemon, how difficult is it to comprehend?

"I edited it, so it should work." ok... still defends my point

"When you sit there and think Hillary being the best idea for president and thinking she should have REALLY won, it screams "unintelligent" So just because he is sharing his opinion, this screams unintelligent? Well I learned something new today.

"How? In what" Trump says that the interviewee made Lebron sound smart which isn't easy to do. Do you understand what he is implying? I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

"It is not respectful to give someone a bad look, its negative expression of not liking that person. It was as if he pretended like he was not even there and did not DARE to look at one of his fans, basically he was shunning him." Fine, lets say it was disrespectful. Have you ever gave somebody who you disagree a bad look? That does not make him a bad person for doing that. Anyone who knows Lebron also knows his strong political views and his opinion on the president. And I don't blame Lebron for thinking so. Trump has publicly attacked Lebron and his friends twice and Trump is very controversial towards African Americans. Why should Lebron be happy to see a supporter of Trump? The bottom line is, giving one person a bad look should not reflect on your personality as being a bad person.. The impact Lebron James has had on so many lives, outweighs this dirty look.

"I'm not justifying Trump's actions, I'm making it clear that he was not talking about Lebron, but Don Lemon, how difficult is it to comprehend?" Fair enough. Maybe I and Lebron himself are interpreting it in a different way than you. I also think the timing of this tweet was also pretty bad as it was right after Lebron built an affordable school for children.

""I edited it, so it should work." ok... still defends my point"

Kek.

What point? You didn't make a point.

"When you sit there and think Hillary being the best idea for president and thinking she should have REALLY won, it screams "unintelligent" So just because he is sharing his opinion, this screams unintelligent? Well I learned something new today."

He said it in a form of being factual, not in an opinion.

"How? In what" Trump says that the interviewee made Lebron sound smart which isn't easy to do. Do you understand what he is implying? I shouldn't have to explain that to you.

I'm pretty sure Trump did not mean that Lebron was dumb, most likely that making someone look smart is not simple. The media just made assumptions (for which you also believe) that Trump was insulting the intelligence of Lebron, neither are smarter than each other, but for one thing, Lebron is not the brightest person, I would also wonder how high his IQ would be.

"It is not respectful to give someone a bad look, its negative expression of not liking that person. It was as if he pretended like he was not even there and did not DARE to look at one of his fans, basically he was shunning him." Fine, lets say it was disrespectful. Have you ever gave somebody who you disagree a bad look? That does not make him a bad person for doing that. Anyone who knows Lebron also knows his strong political views and his opinion on the president. And I don't blame Lebron for thinking so. Trump has publicly attacked Lebron and his friends twice and Trump is very controversial towards African Americans. Why should Lebron be happy to see a supporter of Trump? The bottom line is, giving one person a bad look should not reflect on your personality as being a bad person.. The impact Lebron James has had on so many lives, outweighs this dirty look.

For the first question, no, however if someone had said something insulting, then the case would be different.

"Trump is very controversial towards African Americans."

What evidence would support your assertion on this?

Nathaniel_B

No. It would depend on you, do you despite non-whites? Trump is not really a racist, but some of his supporters are racist, like the people at the "unite the right" rally of August 2017, and some various white supremacist/neo-Nazi rallies. It is fact that not all Trump supporters are racist.

beckysmith

"He said it in a form of being factual, not in an opinion." Well then in that case, maybe he was a bit naive? I don't know enough about the details of that. Besides, Hillary did win the popular vote so its understandable.

I'm pretty sure Trump did not mean that Lebron was dumb, most likely that making someone look smart is not simple. The media just made assumptions (for which you also believe) that Trump was insulting the intelligence of Lebron, neither are smarter than each other, but for one thing, Lebron is not the brightest person, I would also wonder how high his IQ would be. Okay, but you have to at least admit that he was insulting Lebron there. If you say its not easy to make someone look smart, that is no different from calling somebody dumb. And if you want to go into a debate over who is smarter; Lebron or Trump, I wouldn't say Trump is very smart himself. There has been many to criticize his intelligence and professionalism. [1] Like just listening to his public talks, he talks with such unprofessionalism and immature at times some of his common phrases being things like; "many many billions of dollars", "I think I am, actually humble. I think I'm much more humble than you would understand." —"60 Minutes" interview, July 17, 2016, "My fingers are long and beautiful, as, it has been well been documented, are various other parts of my body.", “I’m speaking with myself, number one, because I have a very good brain and I’ve said a lot of things." —when asked on MSNBC’s “Morning Joe” whom he talks with consistently about foreign policy, March 16, 2016. Genuinely, you would expect these quotes to be coming from an elementary student. Don't get me wrong, I can't say Trump is necessarily dumb or unintelligent, otherwise he wouldn't have been able to make all the money he has. But he is not fit to be president, and he is however, very naive in certain topics, and is just very unprofessional.

For the first question, no, however if someone had said something insulting, then the case would be different. Thats the point, Lebron is insulted by this mans hat. That hat represents a man who's morals and intentions are potentially dangerous to Lebron and his family and loved friends. If anything, Lebron is a saint for only giving this man a bad look. He could have easily said something bad to him or smacked the cap off his head, but he instead gave him a look and continued entertaining him, and making his money worth while.

What evidence would support your assertion on this? Look, I intentionally didn't say he is racist towards African Americans because some of you Trump supporters don't believe he is. Fine I will reason with that. I do have a problem if you can't admit that he is at the least controversial towards African Americans. The only evidence I need to give you is this statistic: 82% of the African Americans who voted voted for Hillary compared to 8% who voted for Trump. [2] There has never been such a disparity in election history. Now, are you telling me that this year African Americans were spontaneously all just crazy or something? Even since his inauguration his disapproval rate from the African American population has increased further. There is not a good relationship between Trump and the African American community and it is not just for no reason.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

First of all, I would disagree. You think it is not the role of our government to support equality and freedom for all? Explain to me what is the role of our government then? Speaking of, trump is doing an excellent job and creating wars between each other in America. Again you have to be in the shoes of those affected to understand. You are entitled. If your biggest issue is government intervening, fine. Black lives matter and feminists also attempt to educate people like you who don't believe that their is an inequality.

I'm certain I've already stated that the proper role of the government is to ensure equality of opportunity, and that the government should have no role in picking winners and losers. That equality of outcome is antithetical to the founding principles of our nation. Yes, I'm sure I've said that many times already.

Actually, Trump IS doing a decent job of repairing the damage to race relations caused by 0bama, which is why his approval among blacks is the highest of any Republican since Dole in 96.

This is where your ignorance shows a flaw in every argument you have put up so far. People like you use rhetoric in an attempt to defend your side but it will not work. Look at the numbers. There are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. And if you know anything about percentages you will see a difference. White people make up roughly 62 % of the U.S. population while African American people make up about 13 %. U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer in 2015. It is important that the news sites you use are unbiased because they contain rhetoric in an attempt to filter the reality that you see. I'm beginning to think you're just a white supremacist.

So somehow twice as many white people are shot by police as black people equates to as many black people as shot as white people?!? Math is obviously not your strong suit; no surprise as feelings play no role in that science. And, of course, you ignore the fact that black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at. Just a guess, but I suspect that would account for the discrepancies.

Come back to me when you can use an unbiased source which is not filled with rhetoric. And just a word of advice, don't believe every single thing you hear on the internet.

If you're going to resort to logic fallacies like ad hominems, it's really time to reevaluate your position. Next time take better aim when trying to shoot the messenger. The quote I posted was taken directly from finding by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Look, since you like "logic and rational" thinking, you would know that equal opportunity does not equal equal outcome. For example, Africa is the richest continent on planet earth, yet they have the poorest economy in the world because of past AND current struggles. They will stay this way without outside investment which is "unequal opportunity" per say. Another example, if you commit a fraud (penalty) in ANY sport in existence explain to me why they are penalized. It is to make the game FAIR and EQUAL. You are contradicting yet again. You cannot support equality yet beg to stay superior by not allowing equality.

Africa is the poorest continent because they have the highest corruption. Africans are unwilling to help themselves. No amount of investment will do any significant good until that issue is sorted out. Your sports game analogy also fails. Your proposal, or at least that of Black Lives Matter and feminism, is to start games by giving advantages to certain teams. It would be like starting a baseball game by giving one team 3 or 4 home runs. No sport does that, bookies do that but not the actual leagues. The teams start at 0, and whoever has the highest score (or lowest, in the case of golf) at the end wins. Equality of opportunity.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

I'm certain I've already stated that the proper role of the government is to ensure equality of opportunity, and that the government should have no role in picking winners and losers. That equality of outcome is antithetical to the founding principles of our nation. Yes, I'm sure I've said that many times already.

Actually, Trump IS doing a decent job of repairing the damage to race relations caused by 0bama, which is why his approval among blacks is the highest of any Republican since Dole in 96.

This is where your ignorance shows a flaw in every argument you have put up so far. People like you use rhetoric in an attempt to defend your side but it will not work. Look at the numbers. There are nearly 160 million more white people in America than there are black people. And if you know anything about percentages you will see a difference. White people make up roughly 62 % of the U.S. population while African American people make up about 13 %. U.S. police officers have shot and killed the exact same number of unarmed white people as they have unarmed black people: 50 each. But because the white population is approximately five times larger than the black population, that means unarmed black Americans were five times as likely as unarmed white Americans to be shot and killed by a police officer in 2015. It is important that the news sites you use are unbiased because they contain rhetoric in an attempt to filter the reality that you see. I'm beginning to think you're just a white supremacist.

So somehow twice as many white people are shot by police as black people equates to as many black people as shot as white people?!? Math is obviously not your strong suit; no surprise as feelings play no role in that science. And, of course, you ignore the fact that black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at. Just a guess, but I suspect that would account for the discrepancies.

Come back to me when you can use an unbiased source which is not filled with rhetoric. And just a word of advice, don't believe every single thing you hear on the internet.

If you're going to resort to logic fallacies like ad hominems, it's really time to reevaluate your position. Next time take better aim when trying to shoot the messenger. The quote I posted was taken directly from finding by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics.

Look, since you like "logic and rational" thinking, you would know that equal opportunity does not equal equal outcome. For example, Africa is the richest continent on planet earth, yet they have the poorest economy in the world because of past AND current struggles. They will stay this way without outside investment which is "unequal opportunity" per say. Another example, if you commit a fraud (penalty) in ANY sport in existence explain to me why they are penalized. It is to make the game FAIR and EQUAL. You are contradicting yet again. You cannot support equality yet beg to stay superior by not allowing equality.

Africa is the poorest continent because they have the highest corruption. Africans are unwilling to help themselves. No amount of investment will do any significant good until that issue is sorted out. Your sports game analogy also fails. Your proposal, or at least that of Black Lives Matter and feminism, is to start games by giving advantages to certain teams. It would be like starting a baseball game by giving one team 3 or 4 home runs. No sport does that, bookies do that but not the actual leagues. The teams start at 0, and whoever has the highest score (or lowest, in the case of golf) at the end wins. Equality of opportunity.

I'm certain I've already stated that the proper role of the government is to ensure equality of opportunity, and that the government should have no role in picking winners and losers. That equality of outcome is antithetical to the founding principles of our nation. Yes, I'm sure I've said that many times already. Okay, that is your opinion.

Actually, Trump IS doing a decent job of repairing the damage to race relations caused by 0bama, which is why his approval among blacks is the highest of any Republican since Dole in 96. Show me the facts then. Don't tell me Obama caused more racial tension then Trump. The only racial issues Obama caused was white supremacists not being okay with a black man running the country. On the other hand, Trump is attacking all races other than his own. That is the difference. And you say his approval rating is the highest since 96?? You have been looking at those polls which include 2,000 people and are all Trump supporters. Show me an unbiased, factual statistic that shows his approval rating among African Americans are high, and I will believe you.

And, of course, you ignore the fact that black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at. So you admit to the fact that by population, African Americans are more targeted than whites if i'm not mistaken. And you admit that more innocent African Americans are targeted unfairly. Thank you. Just to repeat what you said, you are for equality yet you support inequality? And people who take a role in activism for their equality are suddenly sexist and racist?

If you're going to resort to logic fallacies like ad hominems, it's really time to reevaluate your position. Next time take better aim when trying to shoot the messenger. The quote I posted was taken directly from finding by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice Statistics. Still a bias site. They use statistics and rhetoric to portray their opinion on a topic. Didn't you learn about media bias in grade school? Or as your God Trump calls it "fake news". The whole premise of your article is this; Black people commit more crimes, and that is the justification for why they are shot at more. And you support that?

Africa is the poorest continent because they have the highest corruption. Africans are unwilling to help themselves. No amount of investment will do any significant good until that issue is sorted out. That is true, however, cash investments are not the only way they can be helped. Clearly education is the biggest thing Africa lacks. Working with governments directly and diligently to build schools is not difficult.

Your sports game analogy also fails. Your proposal, or at least that of Black Lives Matter and feminism, is to start games by giving advantages to certain teams. It would be like starting a baseball game by giving one team 3 or 4 home runs. No sport does that, bookies do that but not the actual leagues. The teams start at 0, and whoever has the highest score (or lowest, in the case of golf) at the end wins. Equality of opportunity. HAHA wowwww, wait to show your true colors. So my sports analogy is actually correct but you are not understanding it. The game started from the beginning unfairly. The global economy started off of slavery. So the beginning of your baseball game is already 1-0. If you know anything about compounding, the multiple over centuries adds up. So us whites start the baseball game ahead, and continue to to play with all our latest technology baseball bats, and gloves while our "opponents" are using no glove and a stick as a bat. And you say it would be unfair to give them 3 or 4 runs?? If you want to talk about unfair, talk about the centuries of the past and the present of playing unfair. Same applies to women. I'm sure you know about women not being allowed to accept high-earning jobs or pursue their dreams throughout all of history. The saying the rich get richer is undeniable and will remain this way unless something is changed. I recommend you look into the term "compounding" and then relate it to African American men and women compared to white men.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

Show me the facts then. Don't tell me Obama caused more racial tension then Trump. The only racial issues Obama caused was white supremacists not being okay with a black man running the country. On the other hand, Trump is attacking all races other than his own. That is the difference. And you say his approval rating is the highest since 96?? You have been looking at those polls which include 2,000 people and are all Trump supporters. Show me an unbiased, factual statistic that shows his approval rating among African Americans are high, and I will believe you.

Race relations took a nose-dive in 2013, dropping to their lowest level this century. Who was president in 2013?

Image: https://www.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/i7/kehjn8url5ds.png

An NAACP poll released on Aug. 7 found that Trump's approval rating was at 21 percent. And a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in June found Trump's approval rating among blacks at 14 percent.
Although a vast majority of African-Americans still disapprove of Trump's job as president, those numbers represent an improvement from his share of the vote in 2016. No Republican presidential candidate has done better than 12 percent among blacks since Bob Dole in 1996, according to Cornell University's Roper Center.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/16/trump-approval-rating-african-americans-rasmussen-poll/1013212002/

...so now Gallup and USA Today are Trump supporting sites?!? You need to stop swimming in the left-wing internet sewer.

So you admit to the fact that by population, African Americans are more targeted than whites if i'm not mistaken. And you admit that more innocent African Americans are targeted unfairly. Thank you. Just to repeat what you said, you are for equality yet you support inequality? And people who take a role in activism for their equality are suddenly sexist and racist?

No, that's not what "black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at" means, nor what this means; "We benchmark two years of fatal shooting data on 2016 crime rate estimates. When adjusting for crime, we find no systematic evidence of anti-black disparities in fatal shootings, fatal shootings of unarmed citizens, or fatal shootings involving misidentification of harmless objects."

Still a bias site. They use statistics and rhetoric to portray their opinion on a topic. Didn't you learn about media bias in grade school? Or as your God Trump calls it "fake news". The whole premise of your article is this; Black people commit more crimes, and that is the justification for why they are shot at more. And you support that?

I know you can read. I know you know damn well what you posted is garbage. What I quoted isn't their opinion, it is the findings of a 2001 study by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice. I suppose some people prefer to wallow in their ignorance rather than face reality.

That is true, however, cash investments are not the only way they can be helped. Clearly education is the biggest thing Africa lacks. Working with governments directly and diligently to build schools is not difficult.

ROLF at your naiveté. Working with what governments? African governments? They aren't in control of much of the continent; local warlords international gangs and terrorists are. I'm sure Boko Harum will be fully supportive of your cause, which brings up another stumbling block to your fantasy is religion. The areas with the lowest education index are Muslim countries that are hardly supportive of human rights like education, going so far as to ban women from schools.

HAHA wowwww, wait to show your true colors. So my sports analogy is actually correct but you are not understanding it. The game started from the beginning unfairly. The global economy started off of slavery. So the beginning of your baseball game is already 1-0. If you know anything about compounding, the multiple over centuries adds up. So us whites start the baseball game ahead, and continue to to play with all our latest technology baseball bats, and gloves while our "opponents" are using no glove and a stick as a bat. And you say it would be unfair to give them 3 or 4 runs?? If you want to talk about unfair, talk about the centuries of the past and the present of playing unfair. Same applies to women. I'm sure you know about women not being allowed to accept high-earning jobs or pursue their dreams throughout all of history. The saying the rich get richer is undeniable and will remain this way unless something is changed. I recommend you look into the term "compounding" and then relate it to African American men and women compared to white men.

I don't know anything about compounding more than it fails a reality check. Asians were brought to the US as slaves. As late as the early to mid 40s they were being rounded up and their property and belongings confiscated by the government en mass. Today, they have the highest household income of any ethnicity in the US, nearly 25% higher than whites. Did they rise to the top by using affirmative action? No, in fact affirmative action is holding them back;

One of the oddest facts about college admissions is that everyone seems to be aware that colleges have imposed restrictive admissions quotas to keep Asians underrepresented in their student bodies, akin to the "Jewish quotas" which used to exist at Ivy League schools until the 1950s. But no one seems particularly bothered about systemic, institutionalized racial discrimination against a large group of Americans.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/affirmative-action-who-does-it-help-who-does-it-hurt

...and once again you fall back on the farce of equality of outcome with "throughout all of history"...

MayCaesar

@beckysmith

Implementing discriminatory measures such as affirmative action or quotas in response to societal inequality merely furthers the problem, rather than solving it. Consider this train of though:

- Black people on average are less competitive when applying to universities, than white people, as a result of discrimination.
- Hence, we need to accept disproportionally more black people to make up for that discrimination.

What really happened? Did the problem of black people being less competitive get addressed? No, their qualification is still lacking. But now you also introduced the discrimination against non-black people, whose qualification will be ignored in favor of less qualified people who happen to have the "right" skin color.

No discrimination has been addressed, but a new form of discrimination has been added. The society became more discriminatory, not less. This is the opposite of what equality is supposed to achieve.

---

The real solution to the problem of inequality would be this: finding the source of lack of the Black people's qualification and addressing that source. Make it so black people are as qualified as everyone else when they apply for a higher education program. Do not try to mask this lack of qualification by favoring black applicants; make this lack of qualification not exist in the first place.

Otherwise we will never get anywhere, and even 1000 years ago, when everyone will be able to change their race instantly for a couple of bucks, we will still be bickering about such an irrelevant category as "race".

beckysmith

MayCaesar said:

@beckysmith

Well said. And it is not just about race, but sexes too. My whole argument is because @MayCaesar believes Black lives matter movement is racist and feminists are sexists. First of all, he is generalizing. Second of all, he believes in equality yet denies the inequality between the group as well as disapproving of these movements. It doesn't make sense. You are correct in saying we should not favor any other group, but the goal for all of this is equality. I have argued earlier that perhaps giving favorable laws towards discriminated groups will help them, but it may not be the right thing to do. The purpose of these groups aren't to demand regulations in favor of them. But it is a place people can go to feel that they are enough. Women were always told you can never be a CEO, you can never be a pilot. Feminists are people who tell these women they can do anything that men do. They are not sexist. I am slightly biased because I am passionate on this topic, but great neutral comment by you!

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

Race relations took a nose-dive in 2013, dropping to their lowest level this century. Who was president in 2013?

An NAACP poll released on Aug. 7 found that Trump's approval rating was at 21 percent. And a survey conducted by the Pew Research Center in June found Trump's approval rating among blacks at 14 percent.
Although a vast majority of African-Americans still disapprove of Trump's job as president, those numbers represent an improvement from his share of the vote in 2016. No Republican presidential candidate has done better than 12 percent among blacks since Bob Dole in 1996, according to Cornell University's Roper Center.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/onpolitics/2018/08/16/trump-approval-rating-african-americans-rasmussen-poll/1013212002/

...so now Gallup and USA Today are Trump supporting sites?!? You need to stop swimming in the left-wing internet sewer.

So you admit to the fact that by population, African Americans are more targeted than whites if i'm not mistaken. And you admit that more innocent African Americans are targeted unfairly. Thank you. Just to repeat what you said, you are for equality yet you support inequality? And people who take a role in activism for their equality are suddenly sexist and racist?

No, that's not what "black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at" means, nor what this means; "We benchmark two years of fatal shooting data on 2016 crime rate estimates. When adjusting for crime, we find no systematic evidence of anti-black disparities in fatal shootings, fatal shootings of unarmed citizens, or fatal shootings involving misidentification of harmless objects."

Still a bias site. They use statistics and rhetoric to portray their opinion on a topic. Didn't you learn about media bias in grade school? Or as your God Trump calls it "fake news". The whole premise of your article is this; Black people commit more crimes, and that is the justification for why they are shot at more. And you support that?

I know you can read. I know you know damn well what you posted is garbage. What I quoted isn't their opinion, it is the findings of a 2001 study by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice. I suppose some people prefer to wallow in their ignorance rather than face reality.

That is true, however, cash investments are not the only way they can be helped. Clearly education is the biggest thing Africa lacks. Working with governments directly and diligently to build schools is not difficult.

ROLF at your naiveté. Working with what governments? African governments? They aren't in control of much of the continent; local warlords international gangs and terrorists are. I'm sure Boko Harum will be fully supportive of your cause, which brings up another stumbling block to your fantasy is religion. The areas with the lowest education index are Muslim countries that are hardly supportive of human rights like education, going so far as to ban women from schools.

HAHA wowwww, wait to show your true colors. So my sports analogy is actually correct but you are not understanding it. The game started from the beginning unfairly. The global economy started off of slavery. So the beginning of your baseball game is already 1-0. If you know anything about compounding, the multiple over centuries adds up. So us whites start the baseball game ahead, and continue to to play with all our latest technology baseball bats, and gloves while our "opponents" are using no glove and a stick as a bat. And you say it would be unfair to give them 3 or 4 runs?? If you want to talk about unfair, talk about the centuries of the past and the present of playing unfair. Same applies to women. I'm sure you know about women not being allowed to accept high-earning jobs or pursue their dreams throughout all of history. The saying the rich get richer is undeniable and will remain this way unless something is changed. I recommend you look into the term "compounding" and then relate it to African American men and women compared to white men.

I don't know anything about compounding more than it fails a reality check. Asians were brought to the US as slaves. As late as the early to mid 40s they were being rounded up and their property and belongings confiscated by the government en mass. Today, they have the highest household income of any ethnicity in the US, nearly 25% higher than whites. Did they rise to the top by using affirmative action? No, in fact affirmative action is holding them back;

One of the oddest facts about college admissions is that everyone seems to be aware that colleges have imposed restrictive admissions quotas to keep Asians underrepresented in their student bodies, akin to the "Jewish quotas" which used to exist at Ivy League schools until the 1950s. But no one seems particularly bothered about systemic, institutionalized racial discrimination against a large group of Americans.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/affirmative-action-who-does-it-help-who-does-it-hurt

...and once again you fall back on the farce of equality of outcome with "throughout all of history"...

Race relations took a nose-dive in 2013, dropping to their lowest level this century. Who was president in 2013? Again, do your background research before making an argument. Yes, president Obama was president in 2013, however if he was the root cause of these racial tensions, then why did the tensions actually ease from his inauguration up till 2013? Your biased sources filter our the truth. Obama becoming president actually eased racial tensions steadily for his first four years and never went down until 2013. Now, on to your 2013 point. Clearly you are not educated on historical racial events. If you take a look at the graph you shared, it nose dived in 2013-2014. Have you heard of the Ferguson, Missouri event? A chain of events occurred over there which caused a huge racial war and has not fully recovered today. This caused a national outrage and increased racial tension even till today. Fun fact, there is still a KKK group active in Ferguson and they claim not to be racist or bad people, they just believe not all people were created equal and they believe white people are superior. I've heard you say the same things indirectly just by the way.

...so now Gallup and USA Today are Trump supporting sites?!? You need to stop swimming in the left-wing internet sewer. All i am saying is that polls are not accurate unless the number of people who voted is high. Twitter is a democrat-dominated social media source and if you go to the comment section of any Donald Trump post you will see that. Most polls on twitter will say that Trump's approval rate is plummeting. So all i'm saying is these polls are not very reliable.

No, that's not what "black suspects were also as likely to shoot at police as be shot at" means, nor what this means; "We benchmark two years of fatal shooting data on 2016 crime rate estimates. When adjusting for crime, we find no systematic evidence of anti-black disparities in fatal shootings, fatal shootings of unarmed citizens, or fatal shootings involving misidentification of harmless objects." Wow, okay. So you think that African Americans are just overreacting??

I know you can read. I know you know damn well what you posted is garbage. What I quoted isn't their opinion, it is the findings of a 2001 study by the Department of Justice's Bureau of Justice. I suppose some people prefer to wallow in their ignorance rather than face reality. okay no need to be savage here, lets stay civil. Again, so you're saying African Americans are just overreacting?

ROLF at your naiveté. Working with what governments? African governments? They aren't in control of much of the continent; local warlords international gangs and terrorists are. I'm sure Boko Harum will be fully supportive of your cause, which brings up another stumbling block to your fantasy is religion. The areas with the lowest education index are Muslim countries that are hardly supportive of human rights like education, going so far as to ban women from schools. I've never seen such a naive comment. This is why people call Americans dumb. I'm guessing you have never been to Africa nor do you know much about their history or how their government runs today. Many countries in Africa are safer than anywhere in the United States. You cannot say Africa is full of warlords and gangs and terrorists. You sound exactly like Trump by generalizing and I now understand why you like him. Just because three out of the fifty four countries are dangerous and contain these terrorists and warlords does not mean the whole Africa does. You do know Africa is a continent right? Besides all this, so you believe all stable, first world countries should just sit there with their hands in their pockets and watch Africa struggle? Your logical arguments can only take you so far, but you lack any sense of empathy. Since MAGA nation enjoys profit so much, even a deal can be made where the United States profits from this weather its with money, assets, equities, alliance, etc.

P.s. Not all muslims don't support human rights.

I don't know anything about compounding more than it fails a reality check. Asians were brought to the US as slaves. As late as the early to mid 40s they were being rounded up and their property and belongings confiscated by the government en mass. Today, they have the highest household income of any ethnicity in the US, nearly 25% higher than whites. Did they rise to the top by using affirmative action? No, in fact affirmative action is holding them back; That is a fair point and I do agree with you here 100%, however how many more black slaves were there as opposed to Asian slaves? Asian immigration dates back to the 1850's?? You cannot compare their affect compared to African Americans. Also, In all of Asia education was highly valued, so as more immigrated to the United States, they were not getting slave descendants, they were getting well educated, cultured Asians. African Americans on the other hand, were mostly slave descendants, with centuries without aid of reparations.

You said you don't know about compounding. Here is what it does. When Franklin died in 1790, he left a gift of $5,000 to each of his two favorite cities, Boston and Philadelphia. He stipulated that the money was to be invested and could be paid out at two specific dates, the first 100 years and the second 200 years after the date of the gift. After 100 years, each city was allowed to withdraw $500,000 for public works projects. After 200 years, in 1991, they received the balance—which had compounded to approximately $20 million for each city. Franklin’s example teaches all of us, in a dramatic way, the power of compounding. As Franklin himself liked to describe the benefits of compounding, “Money makes money. And the money that money makes, makes money”. (Over time, money grows)

The same applied to races over the years. Go ask any economist in the existence, no matter how racist they are, and they will agree with this.

and once again you fall back on the farce of equality of outcome with "throughout all of history"... So history does not matter? I provided you with an example of how compounding works, so believe it or not, history does effect the present.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

Again, do your background research before making an argument. Yes, president Obama was president in 2013, however if he was the root cause of these racial tensions, then why did the tensions actually ease from his inauguration up till 2013? Your biased sources filter our the truth. Obama becoming president actually eased racial tensions steadily for his first four years and never went down until 2013. Now, on to your 2013 point. Clearly you are not educated on historical racial events. If you take a look at the graph you shared, it nose dived in 2013-2014. Have you heard of the Ferguson, Missouri event? A chain of events occurred over there which caused a huge racial war and has not fully recovered today. This caused a national outrage and increased racial tension even till today. Fun fact, there is still a KKK group active in Ferguson and they claim not to be racist or bad people, they just believe not all people were created equal and they believe white people are superior. I've heard you say the same things indirectly just by the way.

Who hasn't heard about Ferguson? That's where an assaulted a cop and tried to take his gun and, surprise surprise, got shot. Then the race hustlers can out and made up the whole "hands up, don't shoot" myth, started a riot, and tried to get an innocent cop thrown in jail.

You have NEVER heard me say white people are superior to black people, or anyone else for that matter, because that isn't something I believe. Every person should be judged on their own faults and merits.

All i am saying is that polls are not accurate unless the number of people who voted is high. Twitter is a democrat-dominated social media source and if you go to the comment section of any Donald Trump post you will see that. Most polls on twitter will say that Trump's approval rate is plummeting. So all i'm saying is these polls are not very reliable.

What's your point? I didn't cite any twitter polls.

Wow, okay. So you think that African Americans are just overreacting??

Yes, of course.

Again, so you're saying African Americans are just overreacting?

Again, yes, of course. How is shooting at cops NOT overreacting?

I've never seen such a naive comment. This is why people call Americans dumb. I'm guessing you have never been to Africa nor do you know much about their history or how their government runs today. Many countries in Africa are safer than anywhere in the United States. You cannot say Africa is full of warlords and gangs and terrorists. You sound exactly like Trump by generalizing and I now understand why you like him. Just because three out of the fifty four countries are dangerous and contain these terrorists and warlords does not mean the whole Africa does. You do know Africa is a continent right? Besides all this, so you believe all stable, first world countries should just sit there with their hands in their pockets and watch Africa struggle? Your logical arguments can only take you so far, but you lack any sense of empathy. Since MAGA nation enjoys profit so much, even a deal can be made where the United States profits from this weather its with money, assets, equities, alliance, etc.

This is why people say millennials have no grasp of reality. According to the UN, only 5 of the 54 African countries have lower homicide rates than the US. They are Morocco, Sierra Leone, Algeria, Tunisia, and Senegal. Nearly half of those (Senegal and Tunisia) are based on UN estimates because the governments are too dysfunctional to generate official statistics. Together, those 5 nations represent less than 12% of Africa.

Image: https://www.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/jh/3jve9hpd2umu.jpg

Considering only 2 nations on the entire continent (Botswana and the archipelago of Cape Verde) make it into the top 25% of least corrupt countries, it seems the primary system of government is the kleptocracy.

Image: https://www.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/l5/4m1d8nlpi9jf.jpg

In fact, travel is discouraged in most of the continent

Image: https://www.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/md/gh0hme0ypfen.jpg

P.s. Not all muslims don't support human rights.

I never said they did. This discussion would go a lot more quickly and smoothly if you stuck to what I actually said instead of making thing up.

That is a fair point and I do agree with you here 100%, however how many more black slaves were there as opposed to Asian slaves? Asian immigration dates back to the 1850's?? You cannot compare their affect compared to African Americans. Also, In all of Asia education was highly valued, so as more immigrated to the United States, they were not getting slave descendants, they were getting well educated, cultured Asians. African Americans on the other hand, were mostly slave descendants, with centuries without aid of reparations.

You missed the point entirely. The Asians didn't need or receive a government assistance to achieve their status, in fact the government has never stopped trying to hold them back. Additionally as you pointed out, Asians value education as opposed to Africans and African Americans.

You said you don't know about compounding. Here is what it does. When Franklin died in 1790, he left a gift of $5,000 to each of his two favorite cities, Boston and Philadelphia. He stipulated that the money was to be invested and could be paid out at two specific dates, the first 100 years and the second 200 years after the date of the gift. After 100 years, each city was allowed to withdraw $500,000 for public works projects. After 200 years, in 1991, they received the balance—which had compounded to approximately $20 million for each city. Franklin’s example teaches all of us, in a dramatic way, the power of compounding. As Franklin himself liked to describe the benefits of compounding, “Money makes money. And the money that money makes, makes money”. (Over time, money grows)
The same applied to races over the years. Go ask any economist in the existence, no matter how racist they are, and they will agree with this.
So history does not matter? I provided you with an example of how compounding works, so believe it or not, history does effect the present.

I meant compounding as you're unsuccessfully trying to relate it to socioeconomic structures. If there was any validity to your theory; blacks, women, etc would have fewer freedoms. That is clearly not the case. So no, history doesn't matter, not the way you're trying to use it.

MayCaesar

@beckysmith

I understand the desire to have support groups for discriminated minorities, and those support groups, indeed, should exist - however, I do not think they should function nearly the way they function nowadays. Nor should they position themselves as champions of the particular group's rights; rather, they should promote global equality regardless of any categories.

The problem with support groups such as BLM is that they perpetuate segregation of minorities, which, in turn, perpetuates the discrimination. It is somewhat similar to a "club of anonymous alcoholics": while the idea seems noble on paper, in practice it actually reinforces the participant's identity: "I am an alcoholic and I am trying to stop being one", rather than "I am not an alcoholic and it is in my past" - hence perpetuating the person's mindset that associates them with an alcoholic. It is similar here: BLM tells black people, "You are black, you are being discriminated. You as a group should fight for your rights" - perpetuating the "I am black" identity, rather than "I am a person, just like anyone else" identity, and contributing to mutual segregation and discrimination.

In a truly equal society, people should not identify as "White/Black/Asian/Latino", "Heterosexual/Homosexual/Bisexual/Asexual", "Atheist/Muslim/Buddhist/Christian", "Man/Woman/Transman/Transwoman"... These should be descriptory characteristics, but not identity characteristics. They should play the same role in a social interaction and in self-identification as the hair color, eye color, breast size, height, voice pitch - aspects of a person, but not definitive characteristics of the person. Unfortunately, with the way minority rights movements are these days, the arrival of this equal society is more delayed by them than accelerated.

I think the model championed by major worldwide human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and Freedom House, is the right way to go in that direction. These organizations do not target groups of people; instead, they target systematic nation-wide or globe-wide trends that create discrimination in the first place and work hard on advocating for their abortion. Everyone affected by their work positively feels like a worthy person, not like one of the labels, such as race or gender.

I, for one, treat everyone like a person deserving respect (or if I believe that someone does not deserve respect due to their words or actions, I avoid interacting with them). In my social circles there are quite a few minorities of different kinds - and, rather than showing excessive compassion and pity, I just treat them like I do anyone else, never paying any mind to their external features. This is the way to go, in my opinion. Identity politics perpetuate the existing problems; denouncing the concept of identity based on external features itself is what solves them.

George_Horse

Man, I don't even know anymore. Funny how @beckysmith says "Trump is not fit for president" but literally considered taking Hillary over him. Are you serious?

beckysmith

George_Horse said:

Man, I don't even know anymore. Funny how @beckysmith says "Trump is not fit for president" but literally considered taking Hillary over him. Are you serious?

Why is Hillary not fit for president while she had years of experience in governmental roles, and was the first lady and experienced first hand?? You should know that experience is the most important qualification for any job...

beckysmith

MayCaesar said:

@beckysmith

I understand the desire to have support groups for discriminated minorities, and those support groups, indeed, should exist - however, I do not think they should function nearly the way they function nowadays. Nor should they position themselves as champions of the particular group's rights; rather, they should promote global equality regardless of any categories.

The problem with support groups such as BLM is that they perpetuate segregation of minorities, which, in turn, perpetuates the discrimination. It is somewhat similar to a "club of anonymous alcoholics": while the idea seems noble on paper, in practice it actually reinforces the participant's identity: "I am an alcoholic and I am trying to stop being one", rather than "I am not an alcoholic and it is in my past" - hence perpetuating the person's mindset that associates them with an alcoholic. It is similar here: BLM tells black people, "You are black, you are being discriminated. You as a group should fight for your rights" - perpetuating the "I am black" identity, rather than "I am a person, just like anyone else" identity, and contributing to mutual segregation and discrimination.

In a truly equal society, people should not identify as "White/Black/Asian/Latino", "Heterosexual/Homosexual/Bisexual/Asexual", "Atheist/Muslim/Buddhist/Christian", "Man/Woman/Transman/Transwoman"... These should be descriptory characteristics, but not identity characteristics. They should play the same role in a social interaction and in self-identification as the hair color, eye color, breast size, height, voice pitch - aspects of a person, but not definitive characteristics of the person. Unfortunately, with the way minority rights movements are these days, the arrival of this equal society is more delayed by them than accelerated.

I think the model championed by major worldwide human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch, Reporters Without Borders and Freedom House, is the right way to go in that direction. These organizations do not target groups of people; instead, they target systematic nation-wide or globe-wide trends that create discrimination in the first place and work hard on advocating for their abortion. Everyone affected by their work positively feels like a worthy person, not like one of the labels, such as race or gender.

I, for one, treat everyone like a person deserving respect (or if I believe that someone does not deserve respect due to their words or actions, I avoid interacting with them). In my social circles there are quite a few minorities of different kinds - and, rather than showing excessive compassion and pity, I just treat them like I do anyone else, never paying any mind to their external features. This is the way to go, in my opinion. Identity politics perpetuate the existing problems; denouncing the concept of identity based on external features itself is what solves them.

CYDdharta does for example.

So yea I agree, however I think the biggest issue is the miscommunication in my opinion

MayCaesar

@George_Horse

Hillary has been in politics for over two decades, she has an excellent education and experience in law and economics, she is a woman of an incredible talent and intelligence. You may disagree with her policies, but she certainly is suitable to be a president.

Trump, on the other hand, is a real estate trader and a showman who can barely say a sentence that makes any sense. So yes, Hillary is certainly a few orders of magnitude beyond his lever, and is far more fit to be a president than him.

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

@George_Horse

Hillary has been in politics for over two decades, she has an excellent education and experience in law and economics, she is a woman of an incredible talent and intelligence. You may disagree with her policies, but she certainly is suitable to be a president.

Trump, on the other hand, is a real estate trader and a showman who can barely say a sentence that makes any sense. So yes, Hillary is certainly a few orders of magnitude beyond his lever, and is far more fit to be a president than him.

Hillary is a professional politician, one of the class of people who got us in the mess we're in. Trump's success speak for themselves. He's the best person to occupy the White House since, at least, Reagan.

WordsMatter

@MayCaesar plus Trump drove a casino bankrupt, that's a very hard thing to do.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

Who hasn't heard about Ferguson? So then why are you showing me a graph about racial tension and blaming Obama for it??

You have NEVER heard me say white people are superior to black people, or anyone else for that matter, because that isn't something I believe. Every person should be judged on their own faults and merits. You did not say it DIRECTLY, that you are right about.

What's your point? I didn't cite any twitter polls. I was using twitter as an example...

Wow, okay. So you think that African Americans are just overreacting??

Yes, of course. George_Horse are in denial.

This is why people say millennials have no grasp of reality. According to the UN, only 5 of the 54 African countries have lower homicide rates than the US. They are Morocco, Sierra Leone, Algeria, Tunisia, and Senegal. Nearly half of those (Senegal and Tunisia) are based on UN estimates because the governments are too dysfunctional to generate official statistics. Together, those 5 nations represent less than 12% of Africa. Yea talk about not having a grasp of reality.. I'm guessing you looked that up in just a few minutes and didn't even attempt to look closely at the details. I can tell you off the top of my head that statistic is not even close. I can tell you off the top of my head, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Tanzania, Malawi, and Mauritius all most likely have a lower homicide rate than the US. Go ahead and look it up. You are right about the governments being not accurate enough to generate official statistics and estimations are made for probably nearly every country in Africa. I have actually lived in multiple countries in Africa, so you cannot tell me I do not know what I am talking about while you are basing your logic off a quick internet search. Now, if you are talking about homicide rates over since data was first being collected then you may be right because many of the countries in Africa were plagued with war, however, recently Africa is becoming a very safe continent and at least you don't have to worry about getting shot at in a school if you live in Africa today.

Considering only 2 nations on the entire continent (Botswana and the archipelago of Cape Verde) make it into the top 25% of least corrupt countries, it seems the primary system of government is the kleptocracy. This i cannot deny, African leaders and governments are very corrupt and needs to change.

In fact, travel is discouraged in most of the continent Ahhh this.... If whoever made this statement judged the United States as they did for Africa, they could say the same about quite a bit of the United States. The American Embassy has a priority to ensure the safety of its own people. And sometimes they can be a bit overprotected. They warn us about even the smallest things such as even buying local sachet water which I drink all the time, or taking local taxi's which is no more dangerous than taking an Uber in New York City. There are certain areas where thing are actually very dangerous, but same as in the US. Also, most of the actual dangerous areas occur in cities, not countries. So to say travel is discouraged in most of the continent is a joke and is unfortunately ignorant. So again, the internet can be a great place, but it can be misleading at times.

I never said they did. This discussion would go a lot more quickly and smoothly if you stuck to what I actually said instead of making thing up. I am sticking to what you said. You said "The areas with the lowest education index are Muslim countries that are hardly supportive of human rights like education, going so far as to ban women from schools." Correct me if i'm wrong but you are implying that "Muslim countries" where the population is majority Muslim hardly support human rights? You said it not me.

You missed the point entirely. The Asians didn't need or receive a government assistance to achieve their status, in fact the government has never stopped trying to hold them back. Additionally as you pointed out, Asians value education as opposed to Africans and African Americans. Exactly, Asians did not need or receive government assistance. Tell me what would've happened if the laws of owning a slave never changed? If it was still fully legal to own a black slave? They needed governmental intervening to remove this. Black people were working for no pay, had no weapons to retaliate against, while white people were going to their home countries in Africa and literally taking them. There was no other way around that if you ask me.

And yes I pointed out Asians valued education as opposed to African Americans. So what's your point?

I meant compounding as you're unsuccessfully trying to relate it to socioeconomic structures. If there was any validity to your theory; blacks, women, etc would have fewer freedoms. That is clearly not the case. So no, history doesn't matter, not the way you're trying to use it. Of course history doesn't matter to you, were not affected, and have a privilege. Compounding directly relates to socioeconomic structures I don't know what you're talking about. Again, look more into what compounding is then argue against it. Look at the wealth gap in America for example, that is due to compounding. Rich get richer. Those with assets typically increase the value of assets. Now go back few hundred years ago. White men were the only race allowed to own property. Property is an asset. The same house that costed $500 dollars back in 1900s was improved and its value rose and is worth $200,000 today. Property is only one example. White men were the only ones working high paying jobs. He receive $100,000 in his lifetime, he puts $10,000 in a trust fund for each of his sons and passes away. His sons are now born into "wealth" and inherit his fathers assets. All this is occurring while women become housewives and are discouraged from doing much more. Black men work their whole lives only to be incentivized by a whip on the back on just enough food and water to continue picking cotton for his owner. Compound that for many years until they are finally allowed to work. Today, the number of black CEO's or women CEO's are still microscopic compared to white men. Compounding continues even after all these years. I am in no way saying to fire all these white CEOs and put women and African Americans in those positions, but I am saying to give equal opportunity. And yet you are still denying the fact that even history plays a part? Go talk to any economist still breathing about the socioeconomic structures from compounding and then come back to me.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

Trump's success speak for themselves. He's the best person to occupy the White House since, at least, Reagan. This is the best thing I've hears all week LOL.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

So then why are you showing me a graph about racial tension and blaming Obama for it??

Because Obama was inflaming racial tensions when he should have been trying to reduce them.

You did not say it DIRECTLY, that you are right about.

You make too many erroneous assumptions. In fact, from now on I'm going to delete all of your delete all of your strawmen and the baseless assumptions from your replies and just respond to what's left, if anything.

I was using twitter as an example...

An example of what?? I quoted national polls. Try to stick to pertinent examples.

George_Horse are in denial.

This is total and utter ВЏ└└ﻛⱨὶͳ!! Just because I'm not a self-loathing anti-white bigot like you in no way makes me a white supremacist. I couldn't care less about a person's race. In your twisted view of reality that means I'm a white supremacist.

Yea talk about not having a grasp of reality.. I'm guessing you looked that up in just a few minutes and didn't even attempt to look closely at the details. I can tell you off the top of my head that statistic is not even close. I can tell you off the top of my head, Burkina Faso, Ghana, Tanzania, Malawi, and Mauritius all most likely have a lower homicide rate than the US. Go ahead and look it up. You are right about the governments being not accurate enough to generate official statistics and estimations are made for probably nearly every country in Africa. I have actually lived in multiple countries in Africa, so you cannot tell me I do not know what I am talking about while you are basing your logic off a quick internet search. Now, if you are talking about homicide rates over since data was first being collected then you may be right because many of the countries in Africa were plagued with war, however, recently Africa is becoming a very safe continent and at least you don't have to worry about getting shot at in a school if you live in Africa today.

Of course I can't tell you that, you won't listen to reality. The UN is just another organization bent on white supremacy. The map of homicide rates comes from a 2013 UN study, probably about the time you say you were there. The only major event to have occurred since then is that Libya has since descended into chaos, like so many other African nations, as a result of NATO operations to topple the Qaddafi regime. Take off the rose-colored glasses and see the world as it really is, not how you feel it should be.

Ahhh this.... If whoever made this statement judged the United States as they did for Africa, they could say the same about quite a bit of the United States. The American Embassy has a priority to ensure the safety of its own people. And sometimes they can be a bit overprotected. They warn us about even the smallest things such as even buying local sachet water which I drink all the time, or taking local taxi's which is no more dangerous than taking an Uber in New York City. There are certain areas where thing are actually very dangerous, but same as in the US. Also, most of the actual dangerous areas occur in cities, not countries. So to say travel is discouraged in most of the continent is a joke and is unfortunately ignorant. So again, the internet can be a great place, but it can be misleading at times.

It funny, I looked at the other continents on that site, and there isn't a single one that has a map of where travel is discouraged. No surprise, since the site is there TO PROMOTE TRAVEL.

https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Main_Page

I am sticking to what you said. You said "The areas with the lowest education index are Muslim countries that are hardly supportive of human rights like education, going so far as to ban women from schools." Correct me if i'm wrong but you are implying that "Muslim countries" where the population is majority Muslim hardly support human rights? You said it not me.

You're not sticking to what I said, you're embellishing what I said beyond reality ... again. Not every citizen may support their government. The US government says every citizen can own a firearm for self-defense. Does that mean every US citizen supports that judgment?

Exactly, Asians did not need or receive government assistance. Tell me what would've happened if the laws of owning a slave never changed? If it was still fully legal to own a black slave? They needed governmental intervening to remove this. Black people were working for no pay, had no weapons to retaliate against, while white people were going to their home countries in Africa and literally taking them. There was no other way around that if you ask me.

"Tell me what would've happened if the laws of owning a slave never changed?" Then we'd still have black slaves. We'd still have Asian slaves. We'd still have white slaves. "T he Scots-Irish have been enslaved longer than any other race in the world’s history." Why is it that only black people need and/or are deserving of an extra hand in overcoming their history of slavery?

And yes I pointed out Asians valued education as opposed to African Americans. So what's your point?

How will African Americans ever rise to the top tiers of American life if they don't value knowledge?

Of course history doesn't matter to you, were not affected, and have a privilege. Compounding directly relates to socioeconomic structures I don't know what you're talking about. Again, look more into what compounding is then argue against it. Look at the wealth gap in America for example, that is due to compounding. Rich get richer. Those with assets typically increase the value of assets. Now go back few hundred years ago. White men were the only race allowed to own property. Property is an asset. The same house that costed $500 dollars back in 1900s was improved and its value rose and is worth $200,000 today. Property is only one example. White men were the only ones working high paying jobs. He receive $100,000 in his lifetime, he puts $10,000 in a trust fund for each of his sons and passes away. His sons are now born into "wealth" and inherit his fathers assets. All this is occurring while women become housewives and are discouraged from doing much more. Black men work their whole lives only to be incentivized by a whip on the back on just enough food and water to continue picking cotton for his owner. Compound that for many years until they are finally allowed to work. Today, the number of black CEO's or women CEO's are still microscopic compared to white men. Compounding continues even after all these years. I am in no way saying to fire all these white CEOs and put women and African Americans in those positions, but I am saying to give equal opportunity. And yet you are still denying the fact that even history plays a part? Go talk to any economist still breathing about the socioeconomic structures from compounding and then come back to me.

History matters a great deal to me, but as a lesson to learn from for the future, not as an excuse for preferential treatment. Your compounding fantasy still cannot stand up to reality. "70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy." This explains why only 1 of the top 10 richest people, the Mars family, inherited their wealth. The rest were all self-made. Squandering a fortune is a story so familiar that it almost seems obligatory. How many times have we heard about a former sports star, lottery winner, actor/actress, etc. that is now penniless? You can't force people to be successful.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

Because Obama was inflaming racial tensions when he should have been trying to reduce them. Where is the proof of this. This is totally made up and you are literally the only person who thinks this. If you want to talk about a president inflaming racial tensions look at Trump.

You make too many erroneous assumptions. In fact, from now on I'm going to delete all of your delete all of your strawmen and the baseless assumptions from your replies and just respond to what's left, if anything. Okay, I apologize for making assumptions, its uncalled for I will admit.

This is total and utter ВЏ└└ﻛⱨὶͳ!! Just because I'm not a self-loathing anti-white bigot like you in no way makes me a white supremacist. I couldn't care less about a person's race. In your twisted view of reality that means I'm a white supremacist. If you couldn't care less about a persons race, why is it such a big deal to you for black lives matter to exist?

Of course I can't tell you that, you won't listen to reality. The UN is just another organization bent on white supremacy. The map of homicide rates comes from a 2013 UN study, probably about the time you say you were there. The only major event to have occurred since then is that Libya has since descended into chaos, like so many other African nations, as a result of NATO operations to topple the Qaddafi regime. Take off the rose-colored glasses and see the world as it really is, not how you feel it should be. loll. Again, as i said if that data is based on homicide rates over 50 years or so, then that data is accurate, however, I would be questioning it if it is comparing homicide rates in 2013 alone.

It funny, I looked at the other continents on that site, and there isn't a single one that has a map of where travel is discouraged. No surprise, since the site is there TO PROMOTE TRAVEL. https://en.wikivoyage.org/wiki/Main_Page ;Its funny, I was talking about the American Embassy not a wiki page promoting travel. Not sure why you brought that up.. Go look at American Embassy travel cautions on their .gov websites and read the long list of things they warn U.S. citizens about when traveling to African countries. Again, I understand why they warn U.S. citizens because they care deeply about us, however, they are overprotective of us being outside the United States.

You're not sticking to what I said, you're embellishing what I said beyond reality ... again. Not every citizen may support their government. The US government says every citizen can own a firearm for self-defense. Does that mean every US citizen supports that judgment? So according to what you just said, you're implying that MOST Muslims aren't supportive of human rights, not all?

"Tell me what would've happened if the laws of owning a slave never changed?" Then we'd still have black slaves. We'd still have Asian slaves. We'd still have white slaves. "T he Scots-Irish have been enslaved longer than any other race in the world’s history." Why is it that only black people need and/or are deserving of an extra hand in overcoming their history of slavery? Play the victim card once again. You are trying so hard to make it seem like African Americans don't have the right to feel like they were betrayed and you keep covering up history with nonsense. It is not even CERTAIN that there were Scottish-Irish slaves so how are you going to say they were the most affected by slavery?? Even if they were the "enslaved longer than any other race in the world's history" was the number of them anywhere near 10 million as it was for African Americans? No offense, but this is why I assume you are a white supremacist.

https://psmag.com/social-justice/the-irish-were-not-slaves ;

The point is, there were supposedly Portuguese slaves, Asian slaves, and Indian slaves. I am not saying that none of these races don't deserve the attention that black slaves do, in fact Asian slaves are unfortunately is not taught enough in schools. They do also have the right to create a group/movement if they like and if they feel that they are being oppressed, however they are doing fairly well as a race and that is probably why they do not have an Asian lives matter. Black lives matter exists like it or not, and I have now taught you that their goal is not to be superior so you do not have to worry. I do not see why you shame their group nor even support it. I will not force you or whatever, but you have no reason to call it racist.

How will African Americans ever rise to the top tiers of American life if they don't value knowledge? They wont. Historically, they were not given a choice to value education. If you look at the numbers and the media, education is becoming increasingly encouraged and prominent in the African American community, so education (not knowledge) does play a large part in the development of a society and it is increasing.

History matters a great deal to me, but as a lesson to learn from for the future, not as an excuse for preferential treatment. Your compounding fantasy still cannot stand up to reality. "70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy." This explains why only 1 of the top 10 richest people, the Mars family, inherited their wealth. The rest were all self-made. Squandering a fortune is a story so familiar that it almost seems obligatory. How many times have we heard about a former sports star, lottery winner, actor/actress, etc. that is now penniless? You can't force people to be successful. "Compounding fantasy" lol. As I said, go talk to any breathing economist and he/she will enlighten you. You like to bring up this word reality as if there is only one truth and it is your truth, but sorry to say everyone can be wrong - including you. "70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy." If you would educate yourself on compounding before coming at me with nonsense like this you will understand that this is an argument towards my point. 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation. Did you ever stop to question yourself, where does the wealth go? Straight into the hands of a family who can afford it. Who can afford it? Most likely a person who has the assets/money to venture out and expand his wealth. Do you know how wealth is created or transferred?? This point still applies to compounding so thank you for helping me. Wealth is transferred very often, that you are right about. This year we saw a new generation of millionaires who were computer nerds who were lucky enough to invest in Bitcoin early and are now self made millionaires. That is just one example. Most of the wealthiest come from business however and it is still abnormal to have an African American leading a large business. I have mentioned this before, but there are things which laws can't change which Black lives matter are trying to shed light on. Things like stereotypes, motivation, and black entrepreneurship investments which are trying to break the barriers of this race wealth gap. Before you make another unnecessary argument, enlighten yourself on what "fantasy" compounding is, and then you can say something meaningful.

MayCaesar

@CYDdharta

What "mess" are we in again? Last I checked, America has been more prosperous in the last few decades than it had ever been before.

Maybe it is you who is in the mess, due to the same flaws that make you support a person who cannot even speak coherently? For many of us, America is as close to the heaven on Earth as it can get at the moment, and we genuinely do not understand what all the fuzz is about.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

Where is the proof of this. This is totally made up and you are literally the only person who thinks this. If you want to talk about a president inflaming racial tensions look at Trump.

Proof is in the #WalkAway movement that began as a response to 0bama's policies
I'm "literally" the only one who thinks so?!? LOL,

https://www.amgreatness.com/2018/09/14/why-black-voters-are-turning-to-trump/

If you couldn't care less about a persons race, why is it such a big deal to you for black lives matter to exist?

I don't care about Black Lives matter any more than I care about La Raza, the Ku Klux Klan, or any other racist identity politics group. As social groups, people can do what they want, but these racist groups should play no role in policy.

loll. Again, as i said if that data is based on homicide rates over 50 years or so, then that data is accurate, however, I would be questioning it if it is comparing homicide rates in 2013 alone.

Nope, almost all of the findings come from 2012. If you have something better, and something more than your feelings, please post it.

Its funny, I was talking about the American Embassy not a wiki page promoting travel. Not sure why you brought that up.. Go look at American Embassy travel cautions on their .gov websites and read the long list of things they warn U.S. citizens about when traveling to African countries. Again, I understand why they warn U.S. citizens because they care deeply about us, however, they are overprotective of us being outside the United States.

Lovely; why are you talking about the American Embassy? I never mentioned them and the map has nothing whatsoever to do with them.

So according to what you just said, you're implying that MOST Muslims aren't supportive of human rights, not all?

I'm not implying anything, you're inferring, and poorly again. My only point was that you can hardly expect a country to be able to compete academically when half the population is prohibited from enrolling in education.

Play the victim card once again. You are trying so hard to make it seem like African Americans don't have the right to feel like they were betrayed and you keep covering up history with nonsense. It is not even CERTAIN that there were Scottish-Irish slaves so how are you going to say they were the most affected by slavery?? Even if they were the "enslaved longer than any other race in the world's history" was the number of them anywhere near 10 million as it was for African Americans? No offense, but this is why I assume you are a white supremacist.
https://psmag.com/social-justice/the-irish-were-not-slaves The point is, there were supposedly Portuguese slaves, Asian slaves, and Indian slaves. I am not saying that none of these races don't deserve the attention that black slaves do, in fact Asian slaves are unfortunately is not taught enough in schools. They do also have the right to create a group/movement if they like and if they feel that they are being oppressed, however they are doing fairly well as a race and that is probably why they do not have an Asian lives matter. Black lives matter exists like it or not, and I have now taught you that their goal is not to be superior so you do not have to worry. I do not see why you shame their group nor even support it. I will not force you or whatever, but you have no reason to call it racist.

Ah, the standard "never let the facts get in the way of a good narrative" reply. How dare anyone other than blacks and women try to play the victim card. Those are the only true grievance groups. Thus spake @beckysmith. No offense, but this is why I believe you're really a black woman.

Your link doesn't say the Irish weren't forced into servitude, quite the opposite it admits they were, they just weren't called slaves, they were called indentured servants. And of course there weren't 10 million Irish slaves, there aren't 10 million Irishmen now, are you really trying to compare the population of an island to the population of a continent?

The goal of Black Lives Matter is to gain special advantages for a race of people to which they're not entitled based on merit. They are, by definition, a racist organization. I don't tolerate racism, it's a pity you do.

They wont. Historically, they were not given a choice to value education. If you look at the numbers and the media, education is becoming increasingly encouraged and prominent in the African American community, so education (not knowledge) does play a large part in the development of a society and it is increasing.

Oh, so then we can start rolling back the special considerations weren't making to the black community. They deserve fewer protections, not more.

"Compounding fantasy" lol. As I said, go talk to any breathing economist and he/she will enlighten you. You like to bring up this word reality as if there is only one truth and it is your truth, but sorry to say everyone can be wrong - including you. "70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy." If you would educate yourself on compounding before coming at me with nonsense like this you will understand that this is an argument towards my point. 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation. Did you ever stop to question yourself, where does the wealth go? Straight into the hands of a family who can afford it. Who can afford it? Most likely a person who has the assets/money to venture out and expand his wealth. Do you know how wealth is created or transferred?? This point still applies to compounding so thank you for helping me. Wealth is transferred very often, that you are right about. This year we saw a new generation of millionaires who were computer nerds who were lucky enough to invest in Bitcoin early and are now self made millionaires. That is just one example. Most of the wealthiest come from business however and it is still abnormal to have an African American leading a large business. I have mentioned this before, but there are things which laws can't change which Black lives matter are trying to shed light on. Things like stereotypes, motivation, and black entrepreneurship investments which are trying to break the barriers of this race wealth gap. Before you make another unnecessary argument, enlighten yourself on what "fantasy" compounding is, and then you can say something meaningful.

There isn't a single economist worthy of the title that will say compounding non-existent capital will get you anything more than compounded misery. As you have already admitted, wealth is rarely retained from one generation to the next. Almost all wealth is squandered, there is nothing to compound. Your fairy tale fails.

There are more computer nerds in the list of the wealthiest people than any other other profession; Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, Page, Brin, Ellison, etc. Tech is hardly a field that represses people because of their skin color (or sex, for that matter). Its one of the most PC industries in existence. You do, however, need a significant amount of knowledge (not education) to succeed in that field. It should come as no surprise that blacks would be underrepresented in the top tiers of that field since, as previously noted, African Americans don't place much value in acquiring knowledge.

CYDdharta

MayCaesar said:

@CYDdharta

What "mess" are we in again? Last I checked, America has been more prosperous in the last few decades than it had ever been before.

Maybe it is you who is in the mess, due to the same flaws that make you support a person who cannot even speak coherently? For many of us, America is as close to the heaven on Earth as it can get at the moment, and we genuinely do not understand what all the fuzz is about.

Longest running war in American history, worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression, worst race relations in at least a quarter century, out-of-control government spending and an ever increasing debt; yeah, the elites have been doing one helluva job. This isn't just heavenly, it's divine. What's not to love? I don't know, but in poll after poll the vast majority of Americans are dissatisfied with the direction of the country, and Congress is universally unpopular. It is truly a mystery. It is to wonder why the American people would possibly want to put someone in charge that would want to drastically change the country's course when the professional politicians have done such a wonderful job.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

beckysmith said:

Where is the proof of this. This is totally made up and you are literally the only person who thinks this. If you want to talk about a president inflaming racial tensions look at Trump.

Proof is in the #WalkAway movement that began as a response to 0bama's policies
I'm "literally" the only one who thinks so?!? LOL,

https://www.amgreatness.com/2018/09/14/why-black-voters-are-turning-to-trump/

If you couldn't care less about a persons race, why is it such a big deal to you for black lives matter to exist?

I don't care about Black Lives matter any more than I care about La Raza, the Ku Klux Klan, or any other racist identity politics group. As social groups, people can do what they want, but these racist groups should play no role in policy.

loll. Again, as i said if that data is based on homicide rates over 50 years or so, then that data is accurate, however, I would be questioning it if it is comparing homicide rates in 2013 alone.

Nope, almost all of the findings come from 2012. If you have something better, and something more than your feelings, please post it.

Its funny, I was talking about the American Embassy not a wiki page promoting travel. Not sure why you brought that up.. Go look at American Embassy travel cautions on their .gov websites and read the long list of things they warn U.S. citizens about when traveling to African countries. Again, I understand why they warn U.S. citizens because they care deeply about us, however, they are overprotective of us being outside the United States.

Lovely; why are you talking about the American Embassy? I never mentioned them and the map has nothing whatsoever to do with them.

So according to what you just said, you're implying that MOST Muslims aren't supportive of human rights, not all?

I'm not implying anything, you're inferring, and poorly again. My only point was that you can hardly expect a country to be able to compete academically when half the population is prohibited from enrolling in education.

Play the victim card once again. You are trying so hard to make it seem like African Americans don't have the right to feel like they were betrayed and you keep covering up history with nonsense. It is not even CERTAIN that there were Scottish-Irish slaves so how are you going to say they were the most affected by slavery?? Even if they were the "enslaved longer than any other race in the world's history" was the number of them anywhere near 10 million as it was for African Americans? No offense, but this is why I assume you are a white supremacist.
https://psmag.com/social-justice/the-irish-were-not-slaves The point is, there were supposedly Portuguese slaves, Asian slaves, and Indian slaves. I am not saying that none of these races don't deserve the attention that black slaves do, in fact Asian slaves are unfortunately is not taught enough in schools. They do also have the right to create a group/movement if they like and if they feel that they are being oppressed, however they are doing fairly well as a race and that is probably why they do not have an Asian lives matter. Black lives matter exists like it or not, and I have now taught you that their goal is not to be superior so you do not have to worry. I do not see why you shame their group nor even support it. I will not force you or whatever, but you have no reason to call it racist.

Ah, the standard "never let the facts get in the way of a good narrative" reply. How dare anyone other than blacks and women try to play the victim card. Those are the only true grievance groups. Thus spake @beckysmith. No offense, but this is why I believe you're really a black woman.

Your link doesn't say the Irish weren't forced into servitude, quite the opposite it admits they were, they just weren't called slaves, they were called indentured servants. And of course there weren't 10 million Irish slaves, there aren't 10 million Irishmen now, are you really trying to compare the population of an island to the population of a continent?

The goal of Black Lives Matter is to gain special advantages for a race of people to which they're not entitled based on merit. They are, by definition, a racist organization. I don't tolerate racism, it's a pity you do.

They wont. Historically, they were not given a choice to value education. If you look at the numbers and the media, education is becoming increasingly encouraged and prominent in the African American community, so education (not knowledge) does play a large part in the development of a society and it is increasing.

Oh, so then we can start rolling back the special considerations weren't making to the black community. They deserve fewer protections, not more.

"Compounding fantasy" lol. As I said, go talk to any breathing economist and he/she will enlighten you. You like to bring up this word reality as if there is only one truth and it is your truth, but sorry to say everyone can be wrong - including you. "70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation, and a stunning 90% by the third, according to the Williams Group wealth consultancy." If you would educate yourself on compounding before coming at me with nonsense like this you will understand that this is an argument towards my point. 70% of wealthy families lose their wealth by the second generation. Did you ever stop to question yourself, where does the wealth go? Straight into the hands of a family who can afford it. Who can afford it? Most likely a person who has the assets/money to venture out and expand his wealth. Do you know how wealth is created or transferred?? This point still applies to compounding so thank you for helping me. Wealth is transferred very often, that you are right about. This year we saw a new generation of millionaires who were computer nerds who were lucky enough to invest in Bitcoin early and are now self made millionaires. That is just one example. Most of the wealthiest come from business however and it is still abnormal to have an African American leading a large business. I have mentioned this before, but there are things which laws can't change which Black lives matter are trying to shed light on. Things like stereotypes, motivation, and black entrepreneurship investments which are trying to break the barriers of this race wealth gap. Before you make another unnecessary argument, enlighten yourself on what "fantasy" compounding is, and then you can say something meaningful.

There isn't a single economist worthy of the title that will say compounding non-existent capital will get you anything more than compounded misery. As you have already admitted, wealth is rarely retained from one generation to the next. Almost all wealth is squandered, there is nothing to compound. Your fairy tale fails.

There are more computer nerds in the list of the wealthiest people than any other other profession; Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, Page, Brin, Ellison, etc. Tech is hardly a field that represses people because of their skin color (or sex, for that matter). Its one of the most PC industries in existence. You do, however, need a significant amount of knowledge (not education) to succeed in that field. It should come as no surprise that blacks would be underrepresented in the top tiers of that field since, as previously noted, African Americans don't place much value in acquiring knowledge.

Proof is in the #WalkAway movement that began as a response to 0bama's policies
I'm "literally" the only one who thinks so?!? LOL, Honestly, this is the first time i've heard of this movement to be honest with you so i'm assuming it must not have been that big of a deal. Also, that movement is just trying to move democrats to republicans is seems pretty much like propaganda to me. I don't think this has much to do with Obama. Regardless of who is president, there will always be people who do not agree with his/her policies so i'm not surprised you hate Obama or whatever, but believe it or not, in the eyes of many, he did a good job in office.

I don't care about Black Lives matter any more than I care about La Raza, the Ku Klux Klan, or any other racist identity politics group. As social groups, people can do what they want, but these racist groups should play no role in policy. So then you do care if you think these are "racist groups" and should "play no role in policy". And I have already told you the intensions of these groups aren't to change policy or changes through government unless necessary. Their main intensions are to work with the people being discriminated against and focuses on directly helping them while attempting to educate people like you (which they failed to do clearly) so to provide a better and more equal society and none of this supremacist crap that you praise.

Nope, almost all of the findings come from 2012. If you have something better, and something more than your feelings, please post it.

Go look at any other sources and you'll see different. I'm not saying Africa is safer than the United States as a whole, but you are greatly exaggerating on how "dangerous" Africa is. This is the first source I saw, count how many countries are safer or nearly as safe as the United States https://safearound.com/danger-rankings/

Lovely; why are you talking about the American Embassy? I never mentioned them and the map has nothing whatsoever to do with them. I am mentioning it because I'm assuming you are American, and so the American Embassy is your main source of information when traveling overseas. They are the ones who provide "the best" information and warnings not only to you, but to other travel sites to inform Americans before traveling. And after being in over five different countries in Africa I can tell you that the warnings are greatly exaggerated.

I'm not implying anything, you're inferring, and poorly again. My only point was that you can hardly expect a country to be able to compete academically when half the population is prohibited from enrolling in education. How are they prohibiting education? The issue is the access/availability to education and financing, not weather or not its allowed.

Ah, the standard "never let the facts get in the way of a good narrative" reply. How dare anyone other than blacks and women try to play the victim card. Those are the only true grievance groups. Thus spake @beckysmith. No offense, but this is why I believe you're really a black woman. LOL maybe in my previous life I was. No offense taken. I actually care about women and about African Americans. so I feel honored that you think i'm a black woman. I care about everyone I don't care if you're blue, transgender, fat, disabled I will fight for everyones rights while you fight for your own and only your own.

The goal of Black Lives Matter is to gain special advantages for a race of people to which they're not entitled based on merit. They are, by definition, a racist organization. I don't tolerate racism, it's a pity you do. Your just chasing your own tail here. Black lives matter isn't to make African Americans superior so do not worry, your race will not be affected. I don't know how many times I have to tell you the goal is for equality not superiority. You see, your problem is that you think these groups are racist and sexist but they really aren't. Just because something supports one society in need, doesn't mean it is discriminating and that everyone else should feel entitled to the same aid which they don't need.

Oh, so then we can start rolling back the special considerations weren't making to the black community. They deserve fewer protections, not more. Yes, maybe fewer. Or maybe the same amount but in different ways. Areas like the ghettos are huge issues in the United States and are a huge issue. Breaking down predetermined stereotypes some police officers have against African Americans leading to unlawful killings is still a big issue. The number of African Americans in leadership positions in businesses is still minuscule. So the answer to this is maybe, maybe not.

There isn't a single economist worthy of the title that will say compounding non-existent capital will get you anything more than compounded misery. As you have already admitted, wealth is rarely retained from one generation to the next. Almost all wealth is squandered, there is nothing to compound. Your fairy tale fails. Okay, I will leave you and your ignorance be. It's sad to see your ignorance block you and knowledge of the world. You failed to even try is the worst part. literally look up "socioeconomic impact from compounding". Or heck, even "compounding". Any economist knows. You can't even find a Fox news article showing otherwise lol. And that says something. It's even more solidified than "the Earth is round". Go look it up

There are more computer nerds in the list of the wealthiest people than any other other profession; Bezos, Gates, Zuckerberg, Page, Brin, Ellison, etc. Tech is hardly a field that represses people because of their skin color (or sex, for that matter). Its one of the most PC industries in existence. You do, however, need a significant amount of knowledge (not education) to succeed in that field. It should come as no surprise that blacks would be underrepresented in the top tiers of that field since, as previously noted, African Americans don't place much value in acquiring knowledge. Thats false. Computers were invented in 1936 and it wasn't the tech stock boom occurred only in the 1990's-2000s so fairly recently. Business has been around basically since humans were able to communicate. The largest industry still isn't even tech, it's Real Estate. So you would be right if you said computer nerds are going to be the wealthiest people or are the most upcoming wealthiest people than any other profession. You said skin color and sex doesn't matter in that industry. While its true that it did not matter as much as compared to other industries, you do know every large tech company today acquired a large investment to get started right? Do you know how much harder and less likely it is to get an investment if you are Black or a woman? It was not a level playing field. And exactlyy. African Americans did not value education. So why do you claim that a group which is trying to support their education as being a racist group? This is white supremacy in its purest most visible form.

WordsMatter

@MayCaesar you found the problem already.

"Black people on average are less competitive when applying to universities, than white people, as a result of discrimination."

You identify here that the source of the lack of competitiveness in blacks is a result of discrimination, not qualification. So the answer isn't that they need to be more qualified, many already are, and the answer also isn't quotas per say, as that doesn't fix discrimination, although science has backed up that large diversity around children lowers rates of discrimination when they are adults.

There are still places that won't hire people because they are black. I worked at one, ivy league black student applied to work at the pizza shop I worked at. We had multiple spots open. The kid was never called back and instead white ex-cons were hired. The owner told me himself he is racist. His son told me their family is racist. How can anyone possibly prove this kid wasn't hired because he is black without the inside knowledge of the families own admissions combined with the history of never hiring a single black person in a city with a pretty high black population? Now this can't possibly be the only pizza shop in America that doesn't hire black people on the basis of their skin color, even though that's illegal. I wonder how many pizza shops don't hire white people?

The answer is solve discrimination and the best way I've seen to do that demonstrably is integration for kids as they grow up, high School level and lower. Build the familiarity. I rely on a lot of the same arguments presented in "parents of community schools vs Seattle school district number 1" which the supreme Court ruled their was no compelling state interest in setting up the demographics of the city schools to each reflect more closely the demographics of the overall city. They didn't rule that it doesn't help combat discrimination, just that there was no compelling interest to do so.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

Honestly, this is the first time i've heard of this movement to be honest with you so i'm assuming it must not have been that big of a deal. Also, that movement is just trying to move democrats to republicans is seems pretty much like propaganda to me. I don't think this has much to do with Obama. Regardless of who is president, there will always be people who do not agree with his/her policies so i'm not surprised you hate Obama or whatever, but believe it or not, in the eyes of many, he did a good job in office.

That’s just proof that you never leave your leftist media bubble. If you left the safety your echo chamber, you wouldn’t be so misinformed. Believe it or not, most Americans don’t think the US needed to be “fundamentally transformed”.

https://thehill.com/polls/236627-hill-poll-majority-feel-obama-has-changed-country-for-worse

So then you do care if you think these are "racist groups" and should "play no role in policy". And I have already told you the intensions of these groups aren't to change policy or changes through government unless necessary. Their main intensions are to work with the people being discriminated against and focuses on directly helping them while attempting to educate people like you (which they failed to do clearly) so to provide a better and more equal society and none of this supremacist crap that you praise.

Yeah, you keep saying that, but what you say is COMPLETELY at odds with Black Lives Matter’s stated goals.

“We demand an immediate change in conditions and an end to all jails, detention centers, youth facilities and prisons as we know them.”

“Public financing of elections and the end of money controlling politics through ending super PACs and unchecked corporate donations.”
“Full access to technology including net neutrality and universal access to the internet without discrimination and full representation for all.”

That's education to you?!? It sure sounds like policy to me.

Go look at any other sources and you'll see different. I'm not saying Africa is safer than the United States as a whole, but you are greatly exaggerating on how "dangerous" Africa is. This is the first source I saw, count how many countries are safer or nearly as safe as the United States https://safearound.com/danger-rankings/

I guess what they say is true, you really can find anything on the internet if you search long enough and hard enough. The results of Googling “World Safety Maps” are ALL pretty much the same;

https://travelmaps.state.gov/TSGMap/

https://smartraveller.gov.au/Maps/Africa.pdf

https://www.ainonline.com/sites/default/files/uploads/2015/12/medaire_travelriskmap-2016_web-1.jpg

https://cdn.theatlantic.com/static/mt/assets/international/Screen%20Shot%202013-04-02%20at%2012.16.19%20PM.png

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-5088977/World-s-dangerous-countries-revealed.html

Africa doesn’t even look all that good on the site you cited;

https://safearound.com/africa/

Additionally, if you actually click on any of the countries listed on the safety list you posted, you get the following message for every country, the sole change being the name of the country.

Sorry, but we haven’t reviewed and assessed the safety level of Zambia yet.

I am mentioning it because I'm assuming you are American, and so the American Embassy is your main source of information when traveling overseas. They are the ones who provide "the best" information and warnings not only to you, but to other travel sites to inform Americans before traveling. And after being in over five different countries in Africa I can tell you that the warnings are greatly exaggerated.

...except I had already stated that the US State Dept wasn’t one of my sources. My sources at that time were the UN and Wikivoyage.

How are they prohibiting education? The issue is the access/availability to education and financing, not weather or not its allowed.

http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20150329-sierra-leone-pregnant-girls-barred-school-human-rights-education-ebola-education

LOL maybe in my previous life I was. No offense taken. I actually care about women and about African Americans. so I feel honored that you think i'm a black woman. I care about everyone I don't care if you're blue, transgender, fat, disabled I will fight for everyones rights while you fight for your own and only your own.

More . If you promote unwarranted advantages based on race as you do, you’re putting everyone who isn’t in the protected class at a disadvantage. Fighting for everyone’s rights is the OPPOSITE of what you’re doing. I promote real equality by supporting equal treatment for all. Racial consideration should be kept to a bare minimum.

Your just chasing your own tail here. Black lives matter isn't to make African Americans superior so do not worry, your race will not be affected. I don't know how many times I have to tell you the goal is for equality not superiority. You see, your problem is that you think these groups are racist and sexist but they really aren't. Just because something supports one society in need, doesn't mean it is discriminating and that everyone else should feel entitled to the same aid which they don't need.

Right, Black Lives Matter isn’t trying to make blacks superior, it’s just trying to give them undeserved advantages. By definition, whenever you give one group an advantage you put all the other groups at a disadvantage.

Yes, maybe fewer. Or maybe the same amount but in different ways. Areas like the ghettos are huge issues in the United States and are a huge issue. Breaking down predetermined stereotypes some police officers have against African Americans leading to unlawful killings is still a big issue. The number of African Americans in leadership positions in businesses is still minuscule. So the answer to this is maybe, maybe not.

LOL, so when do race/gender/whatever based advantages go away? This is one of the biggest problems with this type of legislation, they’re always open-ended. They never go away regardless of societal changes. In fact, they are only expanded and new groups are added. We’ll soon get to the point where the overriding hiring consideration with be getting the correct numbers of the right race/sex/etc people instead of people who can actually do the job. Don’t think that can happen? It already is.

https://www.realclearinvestigations.com/articles/2018/09/25/where_white_men_can_jump_in_the_diversity_game.html

Okay, I will leave you and your ignorance be. It's sad to see your ignorance block you and knowledge of the world. You failed to even try is the worst part. literally look up "socioeconomic impact from compounding". Or heck, even "compounding". Any economist knows. You can't even find a Fox news article showing otherwise lol. And that says something. It's even more solidified than "the Earth is round". Go look it up

You keep saying “every economist knows”, but you never post any links. Talk is cheap. Post some proof. Show me any, ANY, economist that can explain how anyone can get rich off of compounding squandered/non-existent wealth.

Thats false. Computers were invented in 1936 and it wasn't the tech stock boom occurred only in the 1990's-2000s so fairly recently. Business has been around basically since humans were able to communicate. The largest industry still isn't even tech, it's Real Estate. So you would be right if you said computer nerds are going to be the wealthiest people or are the most upcoming wealthiest people than any other profession. You said skin color and sex doesn't matter in that industry. While its true that it did not matter as much as compared to other industries, you do know every large tech company today acquired a large investment to get started right? Do you know how much harder and less likely it is to get an investment if you are Black or a woman? It was not a level playing field. And exactlyy. African Americans did not value education. So why do you claim that a group which is trying to support their education as being a racist group? This is white supremacy in its purest most visible form.

You are misinformed, as usual;

As of February 13, 2018, the total value of all information technology stocks in the United States came to $8.75 trillion, or about 24.1% of the market. It is the largest sector in the S&P 500. Top IT stocks include Microsoft, Dell, and Alphabet.

https://www.thebalance.com/what-are-the-sectors-and-industries-of-the-sandp-500-3957507

In addition, I have already posted a link to the world’s wealthiest people. The richest real estate magnate is Hui Ka Yan of China in 26th place. Microsoft started in a garage and Facebook started in a dorm room. No one gets an investment without being able to demonstrate a return on the investment. That’s the real stumbling block. Blacks tend to segregate themselves to their own neighborhoods and their own kind. Since blacks tend to be poor, black businesses tend to start out with a shaky customer base. The only color investors care about is green.

As for Black Lives Matter’s education demands, they aren’t set up to raise the level of knowledge in the black community. At best, they’ll dumb down everyone else closer to their level. They are excuses for what you have already admitted, that black people don’t value knowledge. How are any of these objectives going to make anyone smarter?

- Place a moratorium on charter schools
- Put a moratorium on all out-of-school suspensions- Shut down all juvenile detention centers- Remove police from schools

CYDdharta

WordsMatter said:

@MayCaesar you found the problem already.

"Black people on average are less competitive when applying to universities, than white people, as a result of discrimination."

You identify here that the source of the lack of competitiveness in blacks is a result of discrimination, not qualification. So the answer isn't that they need to be more qualified, many already are, and the answer also isn't quotas per say, as that doesn't fix discrimination, although science has backed up that large diversity around children lowers rates of discrimination when they are adults.

There are still places that won't hire people because they are black. I worked at one, ivy league black student applied to work at the pizza shop I worked at. We had multiple spots open. The kid was never called back and instead white ex-cons were hired. The owner told me himself he is racist. His son told me their family is racist. How can anyone possibly prove this kid wasn't hired because he is black without the inside knowledge of the families own admissions combined with the history of never hiring a single black person in a city with a pretty high black population? Now this can't possibly be the only pizza shop in America that doesn't hire black people on the basis of their skin color, even though that's illegal. I wonder how many pizza shops don't hire white people?

The answer is solve discrimination and the best way I've seen to do that demonstrably is integration for kids as they grow up, high School level and lower. Build the familiarity. I rely on a lot of the same arguments presented in "parents of community schools vs Seattle school district number 1" which the supreme Court ruled their was no compelling state interest in setting up the demographics of the city schools to each reflect more closely the demographics of the overall city. They didn't rule that it doesn't help combat discrimination, just that there was no compelling interest to do so.

That's a pretty pathetic way to take May's words out of context.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

That’s just proof that you never leave your leftist media bubble. If you left the safety your echo chamber, you wouldn’t be so misinformed. Believe it or not, most Americans don’t think the US needed to be “fundamentally transformed”.

https://thehill.com/polls/236627-hill-poll-majority-feel-obama-has-changed-country-for-worse

I will agree with you on that. Why should i watch crap like fox news anyways? All they talk about is feminists suck, obama sucks, trump is god and has fans. Why should I watch that?? And again you provided a poll from a biased site, so what do you expect? Talk about never leaving a one-sided political media bubble..

Yeah, you keep saying that, but what you say is COMPLETELY at odds with Black Lives Matter’s stated goals.

says who? Show me where you are reading Black Lives Matter' goals from.

That's education to you?!? It sure sounds like policy to me.

SOME of it is policy. I see thats where you have the biggest problem with this group Whats your issue with policy's helping a disadvantaged society?

http://en.rfi.fr/africa/20150329-sierra-leone-pregnant-girls-barred-school-human-rights-education-ebola-education

lol that was written in 2015 and if you read the article and not just the title it was a precautionary measure from spreading one of the most contagious, deadly diseases in decades. Also, why are you generalizing a whole race on a precautionary measure taken by one country which restricts only pregnant women from going to school in an attempt to contain the disease?? Weak arguments.

More . If you promote unwarranted advantages based on race as you do, you’re putting everyone who isn’t in the protected class at a disadvantage. Fighting for everyone’s rights is the OPPOSITE of what you’re doing. I promote real equality by supporting equal treatment for all. Racial consideration should be kept to a bare minimum.

You can't promote "real equality" and not support those in need..

Right, Black Lives Matter isn’t trying to make blacks superior, it’s just trying to give them undeserved advantages. By definition, whenever you give one group an advantage you put all the other groups at a disadvantage.

Undeserved?? So what makes all other races deserving? Do you ever stop and hear your choice of words. And you make no sense. So you promote equality, one person is at a disadvantage but you think its wrong to give him help because it will make the advantaged person at a disadvantage even though he is advantaged already? You're just playing victim and feeling entitled.

You keep saying “every economist knows”, but you never post any links. Talk is cheap. Post some proof. Show me any, ANY, economist that can explain how anyone can get rich off of compounding squandered/non-existent wealth. I gave you proof. ANY economist knows. How many times do I have to tell you to look up compounding. Click on the first article you will see and then try telling me im wrong. Better yet, look up socioeconomic impact from compounding and your mind will be blown.

You are misinformed, as usual;

^ When you know i'm right and can't think of a counter argument LOL

In addition, I have already posted a link to the world’s wealthiest people. The richest real estate magnate is Hui Ka Yan of China in 26th place. Microsoft started in a garage and Facebook started in a dorm room. No one gets an investment without being able to demonstrate a return on the investment. That’s the real stumbling block. Blacks tend to segregate themselves to their own neighborhoods and their own kind. Since blacks tend to be poor, black businesses tend to start out with a shaky customer base. The only color investors care about is green.

You're right Facebook started in a dorm room. Do you know where he went to school? Harvard University incase you didn't know. Do you know how many connections and opportunities you get there? Do you know what the black population in Harvard was at the time Mark was there making Facebook? 6.3%. And not to mention many of them were lucky enough to be supported by the sports program. Today the number of African American leaders in the tech industry (includes microsoft and facebook) is less than 2%. It is uncommon for them to receive investment or support financially, or even partnerships in business. You know even though Facebook was founded in a dorm room Mark received millions of dollars in todays money in seed investments before he even received investments from VC's? Do you know the population of wealthy african americans back in the 1970s when microsoft was created? The Fair Housing Act wasn't even in effect until 1968, just 7 years before microsoft was created. You think its equal just becuase laws say dont discriminate. There's speed limits on every road does that mean everyone obeys it? Stereotypes are in place, especially back in the early 2000s and still continue today even though they aren't as prominent. A white man was almost 10x more likely to receive an investment than an african american person in the 1990s. Tell me thats fair. I wish that the only color investors care about is green. We are not in a fantasy land.

As for Black Lives Matter’s education demands, they aren’t set up to raise the level of knowledge in the black community. At best, they’ll dumb down everyone else closer to their level. They are excuses for what you have already admitted, that black people don’t value knowledge. How are any of these objectives going to make anyone smarter?

You're just flat out racist and disrespectful. Im sure this is exactly what you say at your KKK meetings. You're a white supremacist that doesn't want policy change - fine. Read what I say clearly and this time don't change it with your rhetoric again. first off, im not saying it is an excuse that African Americans didn't value education. They didn't value education as much just because that is their culture. That is just one small piece of the puzzle. You are saying they didn't value education therefore their hopeless and nothing will make them better. I'm saying their education system is already improving and number of graduates and college attendees are improving. All I said that they didn't value education in the past. Doesn't mean we shouldn't help them now.

WordsMatter

@beckysmith @CYDdharta Do either of you even know what a facebook is? A facebook used to be anything from a publication of all the faces and names of all students and staff at a university to just the pictures and names of the entering freshman girls at a university. Obviously it makes sense that a digital version of this would start out of a dorm, and in zuckerbergs case was born out of facemash where you could compare the attractiveness of female university students. So @beckysmith the creation of facebook had nothing to do with connections and @CYDdharta it's no where near as impressive as you try to make it sound, the facebook he created wasn't that innovative or anything like the facebook of today and he wasn't a nobody as he turned down a job offer from microsoft to go to college, he was already a known talent

beckysmith

WordsMatter said:

@beckysmith @CYDdharta Do either of you even know what a facebook is? A facebook used to be anything from a publication of all the faces and names of all students and staff at a university to just the pictures and names of the entering freshman girls at a university. Obviously it makes sense that a digital version of this would start out of a dorm, and in zuckerbergs case was born out of facemash where you could compare the attractiveness of female university students. So @beckysmith the creation of facebook had nothing to do with connections and @CYDdharta it's no where near as impressive as you try to make it sound, the facebook he created wasn't that innovative or anything like the facebook of today and he wasn't a nobody as he turned down a job offer from microsoft to go to college, he was already a known talent

I disagree. The actual creation of the coding of Facebook had nothing to do with connections, true but what it took to make it what it is today did obviously require connections. Not a single company on the fortune 500 had less than $10 million invested in total. Do you really think it doesn't take connections to find even a $10,000 early investment to set up servers to support their early traffic?

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

I will agree with you on that. Why should i watch crap like fox news anyways? All they talk about is feminists suck, obama sucks, trump is god and has fans. Why should I watch that?? And again you provided a poll from a biased site, so what do you expect? Talk about never leaving a one-sided political media bubble..

Because you can’t understand an issue when you only hear one side. Maybe if you actually tuned in to Fox News a few times, you’d realize they DON’T always talk about how feminists suck, obama sucks, trump is god and has fans, and to the extent that they do, they have very sound reasoning for taking the positions they do. You’re scared, I get it, you can’t stand to have your preconceived notions challenged because you know they won’t hold up to scrutiny.

So now The Hill is a right wing biased site?!? Quit while you’re behind.

says who? Show me where you are reading Black Lives Matter' goals from.

I already posted the link in a previous reply.

SOME of it is policy. I see thats where you have the biggest problem with this group Whats your issue with policy's helping a disadvantaged society?

I can’t approve of racism as policy. It’s a shame you do.

lol that was written in 2015 and if you read the article and not just the title it was a precautionary measure from spreading one of the most contagious, deadly diseases in decades. Also, why are you generalizing a whole race on a precautionary measure taken by one country which restricts only pregnant women from going to school in an attempt to contain the disease?? Weak arguments.

This particular argument wasn’t about race, it was about religion. I suppose you think it’s just a coincidence that every single country in the 10 worst countries for women are all majority Muslim countries. Weak reply.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/11/29/247-wall-st-worst-countries-women/19630755/

You can't promote "real equality" and not support those in need..

Incorrect; you can’t promote equality by advocating for one race or a group of races above the other races. You need to choose. What's more important, helping those in need or fighting racism?

Undeserved?? So what makes all other races deserving? Do you ever stop and hear your choice of words. And you make no sense. So you promote equality, one person is at a disadvantage but you think its wrong to give him help because it will make the advantaged person at a disadvantage even though he is advantaged already? You're just playing victim and feeling entitled.

No race deserves to be placed ahead of the others. Once again, I don’t condone racism. It’s a shame you do. All races should be treated equally in the eyes of the law. We aren’t talking about one person. You don’t even view people as individuals all you see are the groups that people belong to. You want to give one RACE of people advantages. That the very definition of racism. Who’s playing the victim card here? (Hint, it isn’t me)

I gave you proof. ANY economist knows. How many times do I have to tell you to look up compounding. Click on the first article you will see and then try telling me im wrong. Better yet, look up socioeconomic impact from compounding and your mind will be blown.

That is a flat-out LIE. You have NEVER EVER posted a link to your imaginary theory. You just pulled it out of your crack and said “every economist agrees with me”. I HAVE LOOKED IT UP. THERE IS NOTHING THERE. I’ve seen people on the internet lie before, it’s hardly mind-blowing.

Image: https://www.debateisland.com/uploads/editor/rc/2khnbvg0fmo5.jpg

Google doesn't come back with a SINGLE relevant link. You KNOW you're posting a bunch of crap.

^ When you know i'm right and can't think of a counter argument LOL

That’s pretty , considering I've countered EVERY argument you've made.

You're right Facebook started in a dorm room. Do you know where he went to school? Harvard University incase you didn't know. Do you know how many connections and opportunities you get there? Do you know what the black population in Harvard was at the time Mark was there making Facebook? 6.3%. And not to mention many of them were lucky enough to be supported by the sports program. Today the number of African American leaders in the tech industry (includes microsoft and facebook) is less than 2%. It is uncommon for them to receive investment or support financially, or even partnerships in business. You know even though Facebook was founded in a dorm room Mark received millions of dollars in todays money in seed investments before he even received investments from VC's? Do you know the population of wealthy african americans back in the 1970s when microsoft was created? The Fair Housing Act wasn't even in effect until 1968, just 7 years before microsoft was created. You think its equal just becuase laws say dont discriminate. There's speed limits on every road does that mean everyone obeys it? Stereotypes are in place, especially back in the early 2000s and still continue today even though they aren't as prominent. A white man was almost 10x more likely to receive an investment than an african american person in the 1990s. Tell me thats fair. I wish that the only color investors care about is green. We are not in a fantasy land.

Is there something magical about Harvard dorm rooms? Do they have access to special programs that are offered nowhere else in the world? Facebook and Microsoft received investments when they had a viable product they could demonstrate. The sole purpose of investment groups is to make money. It wouldn’t have mattered what color the inventor of Facebook was, they’d have had no problem getting investors had they been black, white, green, purple… Succeeding in the tech industry requires a lot of knowledge of tech, knowledge that, as we have both agreed, the black community doesn’t value. The lack of industry leaders in tech is more an illustration of how little value the black community places in knowledge than anything else.

You're just flat out racist and disrespectful. Im sure this is exactly what you say at your KKK meetings. You're a white supremacist that doesn't want policy change - fine. Read what I say clearly and this time don't change it with your rhetoric again. first off, im not saying it is an excuse that African Americans didn't value education. They didn't value education as much just because that is their culture. That is just one small piece of the puzzle. You are saying they didn't value education therefore their hopeless and nothing will make them better. I'm saying their education system is already improving and number of graduates and college attendees are improving. All I said that they didn't value education in the past. Doesn't mean we shouldn't help them now.

That’s rich, a racist calling someone who wants equality a racist. I guess that’s what you black supremacists tell each other at your New Black Panther events. “They didn't value education as much just because that is their culture.” So what you’re saying is that black culture needs to change. I agree with you. Until they change, they can’t make any significant strides toward being being fully equal. Anything that delays those changes, like abetting bad behavior through regulatory and legislative means, is a detriment to the cause of equality. It should go without saying, but you don’t have equality when you have laws and governmental agencies that treat people differently based on their race.

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

Because you can’t understand an issue when you only hear one side. Maybe if you actually tuned in to Fox News a few times, you’d realize they DON’T always talk about how feminists suck, obama sucks, trump is god and has fans, and to the extent that they do, they have very sound reasoning for taking the positions they do. You’re scared, I get it, you can’t stand to have your preconceived notions challenged because you know they won’t hold up to scrutiny.

I'm understanding your side right now aren't I? My best friends are republican and support trump, so believe me, I hear enough about the "great work" he's doing. Fox news is a joke and is as bad as North Korean propaganda really. The funny thing is, until a few months ago, I had no political opinion on Trump and did not consider myself republican or democrat or any other political label. From first judgement, all I thought was Trump was a joke because of his history on television and the way he speaks. So I decided to form my opinion based starting on their manifestos on the political debate. I heard them out many times, and literally coming from the most politically neutral person, I disagreed with nearly every single thing Trump's policies and his ideologies. I just don't see how anyone can genuinely like him. He's literally a comedian and makes me laugh with the things he says no offense. So believe me, I don't have any preconceived notions that you think I do.

I can’t approve of racism as policy. It’s a shame you do.

lol so laws preventing/ending slavery for example is racist and you should feel offended because the government attacked white people's rights? Didn't know thats what racism is..

This particular argument wasn’t about race, it was about religion. I suppose you think it’s just a coincidence that every single country in the 10 worst countries for women are all majority Muslim countries. Weak reply.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/money/business/2014/11/29/247-wall-st-worst-countries-women/19630755/

So whats your point? Are you still trying to say that muslims are bad again? I never said coincidence, but you do know that correlation does not equal to causation right? Common sense

Incorrect; you can’t promote equality by advocating for one race or a group of races above the other races. You need to choose. What's more important, helping those in need or fighting racism?

Why can't both be helped at the same time? Who are you to say we need to chose one or the other? Racism is sparked when advocate groups like Black Lives Matter are made because of people like you. You are used to being prioritized and entitled and when someone else gets the attention you feel offended. If you would be like any normal person and understand the reason for these groups then there would be no racism resulting because of it, and would result in more peace and equality.

No race deserves to be placed ahead of the others.

BLACK LIVES MATTER IS FOR EQUALITY NOT FOR SUPERIORITY. Don't know how many times I have to explain that to you.

Once again, I don’t condone racism. It’s a shame you do. All races should be treated equally in the eyes of the law. We aren’t talking about one person. You don’t even view people as individuals all you see are the groups that people belong to. You want to give one RACE of people advantages. That the very definition of racism. Who’s playing the victim card here? (Hint, it isn’t me)

Laws removing rights to own a black slave gave black people advantages. Same as how they gave asians advantages (Asian slaves). Are you going to whine about how ridiculous those laws are too?

That is a flat-out LIE. You have NEVER EVER posted a link to your imaginary theory. You just pulled it out of your crack and said “every economist agrees with me”. I HAVE LOOKED IT UP. THERE IS NOTHING THERE. I’ve seen people on the internet lie before, it’s hardly mind-blowing.

Its not a matter of agreeing with me, you're just denying a fact. I can tell you haven't graduated highschool yet and probably are in middleschool which is why you're unable to understand the concept. When you learn about it in economics class, remember me

It wouldn’t have mattered what color the inventor of Facebook was, they’d have had no problem getting investors had they been black, white, green, purple
https://techcrunch.com/2015/10/06/s23p-racial-gender-diversity-venture/
https://www.inc.com/this-way-up/why-black-women-arent-getting-their-fair-share-of-investment-and-what-we-can-do-about-it.html
Hopefully this doesn't trigger your entitlement, and just know this is the inequality TODAY. 20+ years ago when Facebook and Microsoft was invented it was 10-20x worse.

Succeeding in the tech industry requires a lot of knowledge of tech, knowledge that, as we have both agreed, the black community doesn’t value. The lack of industry leaders in tech is more an illustration of how little value the black community places in knowledge than anything else.

Okay you're only point that you keep repeating is that black people don't value education. Every single argument you make is so repetitive so i don't know what to say..

That’s rich, a racist calling someone who wants equality a racist. I guess that’s what you black supremacists tell each other at your New Black Panther events. “They didn't value education as much just because that is their culture.”

I like how I attack you for your racist views and you keep attacking all black people for being "racist". Your mother must be proud of you.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

I'm understanding your side right now aren't I? My best friends are republican and support trump, so believe me, I hear enough about the "great work" he's doing. Fox news is a joke and is as bad as North Korean propaganda really. The funny thing is, until a few months ago, I had no political opinion on Trump and did not consider myself republican or democrat or any other political label. From first judgement, all I thought was Trump was a joke because of his history on television and the way he speaks. So I decided to form my opinion based starting on their manifestos on the political debate. I heard them out many times, and literally coming from the most politically neutral person, I disagreed with nearly every single thing Trump's policies and his ideologies. I just don't see how anyone can genuinely like him. He's literally a comedian and makes me laugh with the things he says no offense. So believe me, I don't have any preconceived notions that you think I do.

Not even close, in fact it looks like you're intentionally getting my side wrong. If you think Fox News is anything like North Korean propaganda, then far from being politically neutral, you're an indoctrinated leftist. I'm pretty much a centrist, according to political compass, you, not so much. LOL, "I have some republican friends who voted for Trump", I have some black and Hispanic friends so I guess that makes me an expert on the issues too.

lol so laws preventing/ending slavery for example is racist and you should feel offended because the government attacked white people's rights? Didn't know thats what racism is..

Judging from your posts to date, you really don't know what racism is.

So whats your point? Are you still trying to say that muslims are bad again? I never said coincidence, but you do know that correlation does not equal to causation right? Common sense

I'm not big on religion in general, but Islam is probably the worst of the major religions, particularly from an equality standpoint.

Why can't both be helped at the same time? Who are you to say we need to chose one or the other? Racism is sparked when advocate groups like Black Lives Matter are made because of people like you. You are used to being prioritized and entitled and when someone else gets the attention you feel offended. If you would be like any normal person and understand the reason for these groups then there would be no racism resulting because of it, and would result in more peace and equality.

I've just explained why you can't have both at the same time. I'll say it again, you can’t promote equality by advocating for one race or a group of races above the other races. You need to choose what's more important, equality or helping a group of people? Racist groups like Black Lives Matter have made their choice; to paraphrase the last Templar knight, "they chose ... poorly". Making decisions and promoting policy based on race is racism, and is almost always a bad decision. No race should be entitled to special treatment. It really is a shame you approve of racism.

BLACK LIVES MATTER IS FOR EQUALITY NOT FOR SUPERIORITY. Don't know how many times I have to explain that to you.

Equality is the last thing Black Lives Matter wants. They want special treatment. It doesn't matter how many times you say it, it's always wrong and it will continue to be wrong unless and until such time as Black Lives Matters fundamentally transforms itself and it's goals.

I've just noticed you have avoided answering an important question I asked previously. When and under what circumstances do race/gender/whatever based advantages go away? Who gets to decide? Do we have to wait for Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition to say "OK, that's enough, black people don't need quotas anymore". Do we need to wait for the National Association for Girls (NAGs) to decide for women? Even you can see the obvious problems with that.

Laws removing rights to own a black slave gave black people advantages. Same as how they gave asians advantages (Asian slaves). Are you going to whine about how ridiculous those laws are too?

No it didn't, it made black people and Asian people equal to whites. As I've maintained all along, laws/rules/regulations etc. that give special treatment to people based in race are almost always wrong.

Its not a matter of agreeing with me, you're just denying a fact. I can tell you haven't graduated highschool yet and probably are in middleschool which is why you're unable to understand the concept. When you learn about it in economics class, remember me

LOL, when I went to school, they still taught facts as facts, not the garbage they teach as facts today. That's how I can tell you're an indoctrinated millennial. You think you can call something a fact just by the act of posting something with no corroboration. You can do that, but it isn't at all persuasive. In fact, all that does is hurt your credibility. POST SOME PROOF!!! Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true, especially when it's a logic fallacy to begin with, like this is.

    Hopefully this doesn't trigger your entitlement, and just know this is the inequality TODAY. 20+ years ago when Facebook and Microsoft was invented it was 10-20x worse.
    https://techcrunch.com/2015/10/06/s23p-racial-gender-diversity-venture/
    https://www.inc.com/this-way-up/why-black-women-arent-getting-their-fair-share-of-investment-and-what-we-can-do-about-it.html

Succeeding in the tech industry requires a lot of knowledge of tech. As we have both agreed, the black community undervalues knowledge. The lack of industry leaders in tech is more an illustration of how little value the black community places in knowledge than anything else.

Okay you're only point that you keep repeating is that black people don't value education. Every single argument you make is so repetitive so i don't know what to say..

That was a point YOU made, one of your very few valid points. And I only brought it up here because YOU brought up wealthy people. The wealthiest people come from the tech industry. Education is vital in tech, so obviously people coming from a community that doesn't respect education will be underrepresented in that sector. The Amish are even more underrepresented in tech than black people. Is that proof of discrimination as well? Does the tech industry need to go out to one-room school houses in Lancaster county and try to recruit Amish tech engineers?

I like how I attack you for your racist views and you keep attacking all black people for being "racist". Your mother must be proud of you.

Of course she is, she raise someone who respects equality. Is your mother proud of the racist you grew in to?

beckysmith

CYDdharta said:

Judging from your posts to date, you really don't know what racism is.

Don't avoid my question. Is the law abolishing slavery racist against white people?

I'm not big on religion in general, but Islam is probably the worst of the major religions, particularly from an equality standpoint.

Just because there are bad islamists doesn't mean you can go out and say all islamists are bad and don't allow education.

I've just explained why you can't have both at the same time. I'll say it again, you can’t promote equality by advocating for one race or a group of races above the other races. You need to choose what's more important, equality or helping a group of people? Racist groups like Black Lives Matter have made their choice; to paraphrase the last Templar knight, "they chose ... poorly". Making decisions and promoting policy based on race is racism, and is almost always a bad decision. No race should be entitled to special treatment. It really is a shame you approve of racism.

Thats a bunch of bull. How else do you expect to solve a problem? In sports if its unfair, the other team is penalized. In business if a company is too powerful it is penalized. Even in society, those in need are given aid. The way to solve an unbalance is by working on the disadvantaged side. Doesn't make sense to say this side is disadvantaged so help both sides the same way. You can use this analogy to anything else and you'll see the flaw in your logic.

I've just noticed you have avoided answering an important question I asked previously. When and under what circumstances do race/gender/whatever based advantages go away?   Who gets to decide? Do we have to wait for Jesse Jackson and the Rainbow Coalition to say "OK, that's enough, black people don't need quotas anymore". Do we need to wait for the National Association for Girls (NAGs) to decide for women? Even you can see the obvious problems with that.

You never asked me this and I've indirectly answered this but ill say it again. Advantages go away when they are not needed. Also, you keep thinking of it as an advantage, but its an aid. It's educating, providing support, and getting rid of discrimination. The reason you think its racist is probably because you're thinking black lives matter is trying to give each black family a million dollars or something. You're way over your head and freaking out but its smaller than that. Its getting rid of the ghettos. Putting more kids in school. Changing peoples mindsets. Im talking about basic human rights. So you denying their rights is whats racist.

No it didn't, it made black people and Asian people equal to whites. As I've maintained all along, laws/rules/regulations etc. that give special treatment to people based in race are almost always wrong.

hahaha I cant take you seriously. It gave black people the right to own a home, vote, work for money and you're going to tell me it wasn't an advantage for them? Then in that case, why do you have such an issue with other EQUAL rights laws like such?

LOL, when I went to school, they still taught facts as facts, not the garbage they teach as facts today. That's how I can tell you're an indoctrinated millennial. You think you can call something a fact just by the act of posting something with no corroboration. You can do that, but it isn't at all persuasive. In fact, all that does is hurt your credibility. POST SOME PROOF!!!   Repeating the same thing over and over doesn't make it true, especially when it's a logic fallacy to begin with, like this is.

It's okay. I won't waste my time with you. One day you will learn about it. I literally showed you proof and you still deny.

Succeeding in the tech industry requires a lot of knowledge of tech. As we have both agreed, the black community undervalues knowledge. The lack of industry leaders in tech is more an illustration of how little value the black community places in knowledge than anything else.

I've mentioned to you many times about the chances of getting an investment being black vs being white and of course all you can say is black people don't value education.

That was a point YOU made, one of your very few valid points. And I only brought it up here because YOU brought up wealthy people. The wealthiest people come from the tech industry. Education is vital in tech, so obviously people coming from a community that doesn't respect education will be underrepresented in that sector. The Amish are even more underrepresented in tech than black people. Is that proof of discrimination as well? Does the tech industry need to go out to one-room school houses in Lancaster county and try to recruit Amish tech engineers?

Of course one of my few "valid" points is something you use as an insult to black people. Read up on discrimination in business.

CYDdharta

beckysmith said:

Don't avoid my question. Is the law abolishing slavery racist against white people?

Already answered.

Just because there are bad islamists doesn't mean you can go out and say all islamists are bad and don't allow education.

There aren’t any good Islamists.

Thats a bunch of bull. How else do you expect to solve a problem? In sports if its unfair, the other team is penalized. In business if a company is too powerful it is penalized. Even in society, those in need are given aid. The way to solve an unbalance is by working on the disadvantaged side. Doesn't make sense to say this side is disadvantaged so help both sides the same way. You can use this analogy to anything else and you'll see the flaw in your logic.

In sports, teams get penalized if they break the rules, they don’t make special rules that give a specific advantage to a certain team no matter how badly that team performed in that game or season. In 2005, the KC Royals lost 19 games in a row. In 1889, the Louisville Colonels lost 26 games in a row. In neither instance did the officials make a special rule that the Royals or the Colonels start the game with X number of runs on the board or that their opponents have to make 2 runs to get one score or anything of the like. The teams played, the teams lost. They evaluated their errors and mistakes and came back better the next year.

You never asked me this and I've indirectly answered this but ill say it again. Advantages go away when they are not needed. Also, you keep thinking of it as an advantage, but its an aid. It's educating, providing support, and getting rid of discrimination. The reason you think its racist is probably because you're thinking black lives matter is trying to give each black family a million dollars or something. You're way over your head and freaking out but its smaller than that. Its getting rid of the ghettos. Putting more kids in school. Changing peoples mindsets. Im talking about basic human rights. So you denying their rights is whats racist.

Yes I did, you can scroll up the screen to see that on 28 Sept I asked;

LOL, so when do race/gender/whatever based advantages go away? This is one of the biggest problems with this type of legislation, they’re always open-ended. They never go away regardless of societal changes. In fact, they are only expanded and new groups are added. We’ll soon get to the point where the overriding hiring consideration with be getting the correct numbers of the right race/sex/etc people instead of people who can actually do the job. Don’t think that can happen? It already is.

How do they go away? Who gets to decide when they’re not needed? Why aren’t the advantages being reduced now (instead they’re being increased), despite the fact that there is less discrimination now than ever?

hahaha I cant take you seriously. It gave black people the right to own a home, vote, work for money and you're going to tell me it wasn't an advantage for them? Then in that case, why do you have such an issue with other EQUAL rights laws like such?

Nonsense, those weren’t advantages given to blacks and Asians, that was removing disadvantages from blacks and Asians that never should have been there in the first place. It furthered equality. As I've maintained all along, laws/rules/regulations etc. that give special treatment to people based in race are almost always wrong regardless of who they help or hurt.

It's okay. I won't waste my time with you. One day you will learn about it. I literally showed you proof and you still deny.

LOL, so you still can’t come up with any corroboration for your fantasy and forfeit the argument. Noted.

I've mentioned to you many times about the chances of getting an investment being black vs being white and of course all you can say is black people don't value education.

...and I’ve mentioned about the chances of getting an investment for tech being Amish vs being black and you completely ignored it. Is that proof of discrimination as well?

Of course one of my few "valid" points is something you use as an insult to black people. Read up on discrimination in business.

Answer the question first; how is anyone going to advance in a field like tech if they don’t value knowledge?

Nathaniel_B

MayCaesar said:

@George_Horse

Hillary has been in politics for over two decades, she has an excellent education and experience in law and economics, she is a woman of an incredible talent and intelligence. You may disagree with her policies, but she certainly is suitable to be a president.

Trump, on the other hand, is a real estate trader and a showman who can barely say a sentence that makes any sense. So yes, Hillary is certainly a few orders of magnitude beyond his lever, and is far more fit to be a president than him.

be trippin all over the place!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t15O0R4kVMc

I ain't care bout " she got a excellent education" or experience in "law and economics" if you sittin out here tryin to sound like you black, callin Black brothas "super predators" , tryin to push gun control, and are tryin to fight with Russia, you ain't fit for no White House. That's why I had voted for my man Trump. I ain't no Trump supporter either, just a voter. And I think he ain't do too bad for his first year, but he did good. Hillary would have made this country WORSE than Trump, and we could have had a possible WW3, and I'm gonna tell you this, I ain't got no time for no wars, so Hillary? Hell naw.

frame

Howdy, Stranger!

Communities

Group caught on camera pulling bear cubs from tree to take pictures

In this Debate

If I support Trump, am I a closet Racist?

Debra AI Prediction

Arguments

Back To Top

foot

DebateIsland.com

Contact us

Get In Touch