Hi Funk. This guys is definitely not a Liberal Democrat,
Zo is young. He didn't experience white hatred. He was not there while many Democrats AND REPUBLICANS stood around and did nothing during the lynchings, rapes, and burnings. And most importantly he doesn't seem to grasp the un-godly and tragic DEPTH of Racial Hatred.
I wish he would have a one and one with John Lewis.
Zo would probably tell Lewis "there ain't no going back," and that he (Lewis) had spent enough time living off the past.
The Dems know that the only way they hold onto power is to continue to perpetuate the white racist stereotype - regardless of the status of current events. They know that if they lose traction on that message, they've lost something that can not be replaced.
Fortunately, there is a new breed of Republican who understands that it is vital for the GOP to break free of the stereotypes and make inroads into traditional Democrat constituencies. Here are two recent articles which demonstrate that the Dems may no longer be able to count on the "millennials" as a reliable voting block:
My hunch is that OBAMACARE is a big reason why the millennials are starting to think for themselves. They also have seen the hollowness of the "hopey changey" message and are now QUESTIONING (as youth is wont to do) what the Dems are shoveling. This can only help the GOP in November.
The reason "there ain't no going back" was voiced by John Lewis himself when he raised so much indignation for the recent rape of the Voting Rights Act. Unless the millennials, God Bless 'Em, who are techno savvy, game playing, sexting, texting, facebooking, non-cursive writing, and for good measure: SHALLOW humans lacking in Historical Knowledge come to realize who they are and how they got here you are asking for trouble.
But, if it's like you guys say regardless of my link above, that Racism is dead and gone bye-bye then I guess them Happy Days are here again.
Can we now say the N word then fellas?? It don't mean nothing, Right?
Jimmy, I don't think his age really matters; what matters is that he acknowledge being a liberal at first too until he discovered the truth about it all. He has said just as I have and even Herman Cain himself that progressive liberals hate black conservatives just as much as they do whites; additional we're sell outs and Uncle Toms because we don't fall in line with the 85-95 per centers. Another reason that his age doesn't matter is that Cain, Thomas Sowell and Walter E. Williams are black conservatives that saw and experienced the racism and have all put it behind and so have I. And let me correct you, institutional racism is dead in America; however we still have social racism that is promoted today by the likes of John Lewis, Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Barack Obama too.
Anybody can do whatever they want to do in America 2014,they just have to stop
expecting that they can behave anyway they want to ,stop making excuses and take personal responsibility for there actions to become self sufficient. It's not your fault or Chief's or TOT's fault that racism was rampant 50 odd years ago, most or all of those people are dead. Let's move forward talk about it and resolve it. Political correctness isn't going to help!
I do think its as much Lewis' age as it is his longevity. He - like a lot of other "lifetime politicians" - needs to move on and let the younger generation spread their wings.
Racism isn't dead, but whites don't OWN IT either. By strict definition, affirmative action is racism - but that's okay because it is a key element of the Democratic Party platform, right?
John Lewis should stick to "happy dancing":
Just for the record, John Lewis remains a Democrat.
We needed Affirmative Action in Education and hiring because whites had a 400 head start on both.
So the N word AIN'T racist and is an ok word to use anytime, anywhere, by anybody?
Racial Utopia has not arrived here yet fellas. But we can all pretend can't we.
So Funk, my Conservative friend, it be kool now and ok if I say you're my main nigga! Is that alright? If it isn't please tell me why. I am using it as a term of endearment, NOT RACIAL HATRED. It's ok right???
Jimmy, personally I feel that you can call me your main nigga all you want to as a term of endearment; however your progressive liberal friends won't. That's why it's a fact that progressives keep the hatred going not conservatives. I have black friends that feel like we can do it but you can't. I tell them just like I'm telling you now that it's a double standard if we think we can go out in public or at any type of event and say it, an expect no else, especially whites not to.
John Lewis need to take a look in the mirror and move forward and affirmative action isn't needed anymore,
AS trite as this statement is: Those that forget history are doomed to repeat it.
But Funk, don't you find the terms, nigga and cracker patronizing at least?
Their use obliterates the individuality to whom they are referring to?
It is a diminishing descriptive term.(s)
I think it is wrong.
Jimmy, generally I agree with you. I'm just saying if blacks gonna continue to call each other this as a " term of endearment" then I say you can too!
That's the only way to be fair to everyone.
Funkentelecky, I just watched the video. I think we all need to listen carefully to every word spoken.
I believe I understand the message and I agree entirely.
Much of any history is "ugly" and best if forgiven even if not forgotten.
Most dark times have some light if individuals will look for the light.
Thank you for posting this blog.
Well Funk, I am not going to be the first white boy to go to Harlem and ask where might I find me some niggers to hang with.
YOu are the exception, Funk, not the norm.
I think, from my white perspective, that what is lacking here is the full understanding that amounts to a perverted genetic code amongst whites to hate people of color. It is almost like it is in most of our DNA. I do not think Blacks grasp that fact.
So, I am dropping the term as you being my main nigga. I find it demeaning and patronizing to you.
It's like me saying that SEBE is my favorite YANKEE.
Jimmy, well said. We have an obligation to not continue to perpetuate racial and "purism" This goes for all races though. Last time I checked whitey is no worse than other ethnicities. Change will only occur if it is a collective effort. Funk, I have a lot of respect for you because you identify yourself by who you are; not what color you are. That in it self is the first step. Good conversation all.
Jimmy, I respect your freedom to choose what you do in your life according to the facts at hand. Just some more info for your understanding that the term of endearment is pronounced nig-gah written down on paper as nigga. The hateful racial epithet is pronounced as you already know as nig-ger written down on paper as nigger. I know that I could have a personal and open discussion with you without any tension whatsoever because of what you have explained to me about yourself. I've already done so with friends of mine who are white and I have some good friends too. In 2014 and beyond we must remember to judge people individually and by the content of their character and not by our past history that they had nothing to do with.
TOT, you're welcome and I agree with you that we must look/search for the light to move forward.
HMJC, I appreciate your kind comments about me and that most of us on this site do so as we'll.
Prejudice runs deep...
I saw that article. What it COMPLETELY fails to address is what "offenses" are being committed and especially who the "suspenders" are. In other words, I'd like to see whether there is anything disproportionate about what the black students are being suspended for as opposed to their suspended white counterparts. Also - how many "chances" do individual students get BEFORE they are suspended? Finally, WHO is actually doing the suspending? I can't find any stats on what percentages of teachers/principals are running public preschools around the country. Your article implies that "whitey" administrators are suspending black preschoolers. But the article you cite doesn't actually say this. I'm just wondering how many black teachers/administrators are doing the suspending - as opposed to whiteys.
My wife worked for the Liberty Armed Services "Pryme Tyme" afterschool program in the 1990s, and she can tell you from personal experience that (and I'm sorry to say this but I'm just being honest) the black children she was required to supervise were generally the most undisciplined and most disruptive kids in the class. She would come home after work sometimes literally in tears and tearing her hair out. And my wife raised two very energetic kids and had 30+ years of baby-sitting/child care experience BEFORE she went to work for the YMCA. While she was doing babysitting/child care from the 60s-80s, she had children of all races (more blacks, Asians than white) and never had any problems with the kids or their parents. But if one can compare my wife's Pryme Tyme experience with public preschool (which I AM), I'm just saying there's undoubtedly a hell of a lot more to the story than the Time.com story you cite is reporting.
Well, the Time piece was not written in Ph.D thesis format. Anyway, what do you want for a buck fifty? You are mixing Academia benchmarks incorrectly with media benchmarks.
Those are Two entirely different standards.
You cited the time.com article as if it was FACT. With your comment that "prejudice runs deep," you were suggesting that you agreed with the article. I pointed out the flaws in the article, which obviously is not a "thesis," but what obviously was sending a message that "whitey is at it again." My "benchmarks" were not academia but were PERSONAL EXPERIENCES. Also, I asked several questions which the article fails to asks and which undercuts their premise.
I do take what I can get, and when something smacks of irresponsible journalism or race-baiting, I SAY SO. In this case, I don't need to research anything - the PEOPLE WHO WROTE THE ARTICLE should have done more research, IF they intended to do more than point a finger which they failed to substantiate.
It's shoddy journalism Sebe fraught with instances of Academic variability.
I never called the piece FACT!!!
Then why use it as an example that "prejudice runs deep?" When you say that, you hold the piece up as being a factual description of the way things are. The article asserts certain facts to support an insinuation that black children are being victimized - even in public pre-school - by the system. However, without providing the facts and information I pointed out in my post, it feeds the stereotype that - once again - racism MUST BE at work. You said "prejudice runs deep," which can only be seen as your agreement with that assertion.
I actually did research the racial representation of teachers and administrators in public pre-school across the nation - and came up empty. My hunch is that these statistics are not centrally kept, because they haven't been needed to justify or refute anything. My point was that perhaps - just PERHAPS:
*A lot of the folks doing the suspending are actually black teachers/administrators.
*There are standards at those pre-schools which outline expected behavior on the part of the children and the consequences if they don't conform to those standards.
*When a child consistently misbehaves or is disruptive - even in pre-school - parents ordinarily get notified and their assistance is requested to get their child to conform to expected "classroom behavior."
*When these measures are exhausted and you STILL have instances of indiscipline, misbehavior, classroom disruption, etc., - then and only then would you see a suspension.
The article you cite makes no mention of any of this. It doesn't say who's doing the suspending, or under what circumstances the suspensions are occurring.
I pointed out my wife's personal experiences which are nothing more than anecdotal, but which gave rise to MY ASKING THE QUESTIONS.
My Bottom Line (all along): The Time.com article doesn't tell the whole story, and its implications feed the stereotype that "whitey is at it again." All I pointed out was that this ain't necessarily so.
A Doctoral Thesis it is not. Be nice if it was but then we would have fairly long lapses of time for articles appearing in Time and other magazines and media due to the length of research required. (Think of PEOPLE the magazine here which comes out weekly) Time points out the issues, it is up to the dedicated few of us to ascertain the actual veracity of what has been pointed out. Investigative Journalism when done extensively can reveal much. But, again it ain't no PHD thesis. Investigative Journalism though, can and does shine a light on issues worthy of further pursuit. i.e. Washington Post writers Woodward and Bernstein and their reporting of the Watergate break in. That piece of journalism led to a President of the United States resigning from office.
And...prejudice DOES indeed run deep and requires not a Doctoral Thesis to lend it validation. Instances are reported frequently i.e. Emit Till lynched for whistling at a white woman, Susan Smith's ID of who took her car and two babies later found drowned and dead in a SC lake,(said it was a hooded black man), OJ verdict (reverse prejudice via jury nullification??),Stop and Search Law in N.Y. stats showing cops stop and search black males more than any other group and profiling Hispanics driving up I-95 as 'suspected' drug couriers...etc
So, yep, I will put my dime to your nickel that your JUST PERHAPS is 'just perhaps' not correct when placed under an Academic microscope. Whites have been abusing and taking advantage of blacks, women, Asians, Hispanics, the poor and other groups throughout the history of America.
If that was not true we would have a National Association for the Advancement of White People.(We do but they are known as Skin Heads, White Aryan Nation, White Aryan Resistance and of course those brave white boys hiding behind them sheets over their faces and clothes) This is because White American Males are the ones doin the oppressing. Like summoning children of color to the Principal's office and later suspending them.
And it is still going on. MLK got shot for shining a light on this prejudicial cancer. And as he prophesized he "might not get there with us..." but one day his dream will be realized, regardless of the unjustified wall of defense put up by self-marginalized white men and women in our educational system.
When we can actually find out the answer, I might bet. But it's impossible, and the people at Time know this. But they still styled the article insinuating that "whitey is at it again" - since we must assume that blacks cannot be racist toward fellow blacks.
No way to prove it one way or another with the current statistical system in place. That was my point and I'm sticking to it.
Good debate, I would like to add that when you accuse or insinuate a position; examples of it brings clarity to it.
"since we must assume that blacks cannot be racist toward fellow blacks."
Sebe, buddy, I do not know if its from living in the South all my life or what. And I just may need Funk's input here. But there ARE variations of Ebony. Variations from ones pigmentation being so black it lends itself to the color purple. It ranges all the way to people of 'color' who could pass as whites.
To assume that there is NO racism amongst Blacks gauged by my life's experience is erroneous. I've observed it. Or just maybe from my privileged white perspective have it completely wrong.
I just don't think I'm wrong.