The positive ends which BLM seeks are nearly endless. Who among us but the vile racists could argue that this isn't an enlightened goal?
You see, arguing against free speech is not wrong or evil. But arguing for racial separatism, now that's wrong and evil. Except if you're arguing for black separatism. That's acceptable.
Sure, 90% of us voluntarily live separately, in neighborhoods that overwhelmingly or totally match our own race and we voluntarily choose schools for our kids that are overwhelmingly comprised of people matching our own race or we choose out churches overwhelmingly or totally comprised of people of our own race or that about everyone here married someone of their own race and did not even date anyone of a different race. And saying that you should only date and marry someone of your own race is wrong and evil. Except if it's black women complaining about black men dating white women. That's different. That's just not the same as a white man saying that white women shouldn't date black men. Or white parents saying their daughters should not date outside their race. We all understand this, do we not? It's okay to behave the way in which the vast majority of us do: voluntarily and willfully seeking out racially separate existences in terms of where we live and with whom we associate outside of our workplaces, but it's entirely wrong to say that such behaviors are acceptable...except if your skin is of a particular hue.
For the enlightened folks on the board:
- how many close black friends do you have?
- how many black folks live next to you?
- how many black women did you date? How many did you consider dating?
- about what percentage of your church is black?
- about what percentage of your child's school is black?
It seems to me that if your answers are deficient in one or more of those areas, one of the best ways to fight against this evil of racial separatism is to change your own lives and move yourselves away from your racial seclusion. How will you go about changing this in your own lives? Note: going to jazz festivals won't be a sufficient answer in this case.
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
(no message)
He is a black Canadian from Guyana.
There are black kids in my neighborhood, I see them regularly. It's the white kids from a certain trailer park that put me on alert...
Never dated a black girl, but I wouldn't have been opposed to it.
My children each have several black kids in their class. One of my sons friends (and he has few) is black.
In fact, you may very well be one of those "deplorables."
(no message)
the white folks who are down with the cause and vocal about it tend to be middle to upper class and while they say all the right things and "deplore" the concept of racial separatism, when it comes to how they actually behave, they willfully choose lily-white neighborhoods, attend lily-white churches and send their kids to lily-white schools.
So, who's more ethical: the working class white person who lives among black people, associates more with black people, attends a non-denominational or evangelical church with a much higher percentage of black people, sends his/her kids to a school with many more black people, yet occasionally say things that hint at some sort of belief in racial separation or the upper-class white person who says all the right things yet lives a much more racially separate life?
(no message)
(no message)
You also don't need to go to a black church or live in a black neighborhood to know that the klan and Nazies are abominations.
Artificial strawman.
That deserves some sort of medal or reward.
Who here or elsewhere argues that the Klan or Nazis aren't abominations? Other than Trump, of course.
Some of you lost your minds nine months ago and you still haven't found them.
say that hint at some sort of belief in separation that would be more benign than the klan and Nazi beliefs on that issue?
He never said that anyone is denying that the KKK is an abomination.
Your basic move is to willfully misinterpret a post and then attack what you claim it says.
Foolproof, really, since you get to set not only the terms of debate but reality itself.
Who argued that?
Who here or elsewhere has argued that the Klan or Nazis aren't bad, other than those folks themselves?
But will roll out the red carpet (if they had one) when they visit just like anyone else. There was a black kid that moved to our school when I was in HS, my brother befriended him and my mother invited him over for lasagna (her best dish by far). I can only speak for us deplorables in Iowa, but there were very few if any racists in my hometown and I knew almost everyone.
What rural Iowa people won't tolerate is laziness, theft and cornhusker fans.
But I get your point, and in my experience you are exactly right. The people who are most vocal about "social justice" are also the people who are the most "socially insulated". It's because they grew up sheltered and after suffering through Chris' Social Justice 101 class are now are starting to feel guilty about it. Not guilty enough to actually do anything, but enough to affect their dialog on message boards and at cocktail parties.
this is obviously just one person's experiences, but my father attended various Badgers road games: Purdue, Illinois, Minnesota, IU, and I believe Northwestern, and also Iowa. Great experiences with all the opposing fans except at Iowa City. Not just a bad experience, but an atrocious experience with Iowa fans. As in never did and never would go back. Conversely, both from experience and from various internet posts, Huskers fans were entirely civil.
I'd much rather spend an afternoon at Camp Randall (and have) then at Kinnick.
They will not acknowledge this, but the last thing they will choose is to live in a black neighborhood. They want no part of that. They choose to live racially separate lives, but they simultaneously term any white person who argues for racial separatism as evil, even when that person lives a more racially integrated existence. We live in a strange culture.