How White America Got Rich

How White America got rich | Abagond
http://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/02/25/how-white-america-got-...
Abagond
500 words a day on whatever I want
Feeds: Posts Comments
How White America got rich

Thu 25 Feb 2010 by abagond
(http://www.skinnerinc.com/resources /highlights/rare-sample-rifle.php) How did White America become so rich? Those hard-working, pull-themselves-up-by-their-bootstraps White Americans experienced at least three windfalls in their history: 1. Land: The largest piece of virgin farm land in the world as of 1500, more farm land than in all of China! White Americans took it from Native Americans at low cost. 2. Labour: at cut rates from people of colour: slaves, coolies, migrant workers, Mexican nannies and landscapers, etc. Blacks are still markedly underpaid even when you take education into account. 3. Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans (see #2). And that is not all. I am sure readers can think of a few more.
1 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
So White Americans who think it was all just a matter of hard work and the right values are missing the bigger picture. And even the narrower picture: As much as White Americans like to narrow history to just their own family (My family never owned slaves, My grandfather came to America with $25 in his pocket), they are forgetting even that little bit of history: if hard work and the right values were enough, then why on earth did their forefathers leave Europe to live the rest of their lives in a foreign land across the ocean? Because they knew that hard work and the right values were not enough in themselves, not by a long shot. There are white countries, and even some Asian ones, where people are just as well off as White Americans without enjoying any of these windfalls. What about them? Some of them had empires of their own. Even Belgium once ruled the Congo. As for the others, like Norway or Switzerland, it is hard to believe they would have got so rich without America and all the wealth that poured into Europe from the white empires. Given that white people ruled most of the world in 1900 and are now so rich it is profoundly dishonest to believe: 1. It was just a matter of brains, hard work and clean living. 2. It was because white people are just a cut above people of colour, like it or not. White Americans like to believe that stuff because: 1. It appeals to their white pride (which they deny they have); 2. It fits their racist picture of the world (which they think is just seeing the world as it is); 3. It covers over their dirty, ugly history of how they got so rich. If whites are just naturally better than others then they would have been rich and powerful all throughout history, or at least most of it, not just during chance bits of it like now and in the time of Rome (which also got rich by robbing and ruling other lands). And if it is just a matter brains, hard work and clean living , then why all the slaves and dead natives? See also: white people (../2008/07/05/white-people/) white pride (../2009/12/29/white-pride/) The white lens (../2009/11/13/the-white-lens/) The white inventor argument (../2009/11/06/the-white-inventor-argument/) It was the times! (../2010/02/20/it-was-the-times/) and it is still the times (../2010/02/24 /my-family-never-owned-slaves/) My family never owned slaves (../2010/02/24/my-family-never-owned-slaves/) American history books and racism (../2010/02/17/american-history-books-and-racism/) British Empire (../2006/06/10/british-empire/) guns, germs and steel (../2009/11/09/guns-germs-and-steel/) Posted in stuff | 256 Comments
2 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
256 Responses
Mira on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 14:54:36 This is a nice post but, like many others, I dont think it would reach white people who need to know (or think, at least) about these things. However, even if they start thinking- the next question is: now what? How to really change something? (And when I say really, I mean really- not in a way of political correctness and similar stuff).
Hathor on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 14:59:16 What gets me is when some well to do Blacks reinforce white beliefs and imply that only themselves have worked hard and those other Negroes havent.
Patricia Kayden Good post,
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 16:06:56
But what about White privilege? Some Whites would argue that their ancestors came over here with pennies in their pockets and just the clothing on their back, but were able to do well and live the American dream. I believe that White privilege, combined with anti-Black racism, explains why so many dirt poor Europeans were able to come here with next-to-nothing, but do well in a few decades. White privilege means that for generations Whites got the best jobs, were allowed to live in the best communities, hold political office, etc., while Blacks were prohibited BY LAW from doing the same in much of early American history. This happened even in the so called free North. To this day, there are some Black families who just now have one member graduating from institutions of higher education, or owning a home, etc.
BLACKkittenROAR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 16:13:08 There are white countries, and even some Asian ones, where people are just as well off as White Americans without enjoying any of these windfalls. What about them? Some of them had empires of their own. Even Belgium once ruled the Congo. As for the others, like Canada or Switzerland, it is hard to believe they would have got so rich without America and all the wealth that poured into Europe from the white empires. Im really confused as to why you believe Canada is as well off as America, but somehow has a cleaner past. Like America, Canada robbed the First Nations of their land, committed genocidal acts against the First Nations (50% of Native Children sent to residential schools diedand it was mandatory by law that they be sent) and still to this day does not respect or provide the same basic fundamental human rights to the First Nations people (despite what you may have been led to believe from the bit of propaganda which was the Olympic opening ceremonies):
3 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6637396204037343133&hl=en#
As for the labour aspect, Canada does indeed have slavery in its past, but its very much downplayed in our history: http://apastdenied.ca/ Many of the first Blacks in Nova Scotia were brought to this country via Jamaica to be slaves. Even when I was in high school, we did learn that there was African slaves in Quebec, but because of the climate many of them died so they enslaved the First Nations to do their labour instead. Canada is not the Utopian multicultural nation it would like the world to believe it is. Multiculturalism is almost more detrimental and dangerous than blatant racism because it takes the stance that racism is caused by cultural differences, and that if multiculturalism is embraced, then there would be no racism This simply just isnt true. As for the third windfall being money made from war, I cant really speak to, because I dont really have a clue. But certainly the vast amounts of natural resources Canada has, has made it a very rich country (our water is piped to the US to water your golf courses)
abagond Black Kitten Roar:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 16:27:59
Excellent comment. Thank you. You are right, Canada is a bad example of an innocent country. I will replace it with Norway.
dimples How white got rich? .
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 16:29:08
From centuries of Lying, stealing, robbing, raping and manipulation. They got into the minds of other and the rest is history.
4 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
abagond Patricia:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 16:40:00
Right, there is white privilege too. The post is not meant to list everything. For example, the advantages the come from American world power were left out. That is why I wrote, And that is not all. I am sure readers can think of a few more.
BLACKkittenROAR Abagond:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 16:41:57
Thank you. So often white Canadians like to forget about its role as a colonial power and pretend that we as a country are perfect. Even our current Prime Minister has been quoted as having this belief that somehow we as a country have no blood on our hands. The acts of genocide Canada has in its past, and the environmental racism past and present it continues to perpetrate needs to not be ignored.
J How Europe Underdeveloped Africa by Walter Rodney
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:07:53
http://www.marxists.org/subject/africa/rodney-walter/how-europe/index.htm
abagond @ Mira and Tulio (who brought up this issue on another thead):
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:25:18
If White Americans read what I write and clearly some do that is great. At least they have heard what I have to say even if they utterly disagree. Maybe it will make more sense to them down the road. But in the main I do not write for them: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/09/26/what-this-blog-has-taught-me-about-white-people/ http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/10/08/langston-hughes-on-wanting-to-be-white/
Natasha W on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:31:45 Thanks, BlackKittenRoar for the info! I wasnt aware of all that. And very informative post, Abagond. The rifle is just the perfect touch.
no_slappz on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:39:57 abagond, you really really need a course in economics and another course in history. As for Norway, it is a small country I think the population is around 9 million, only a little larger than the population of NY City with a homogeneous population. Why is Norway a prosperous nation? One word: OIL. Norway owns the oil beneath much of the North Sea. The people of Norway consume 10% of the
5 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
annual North Sea oil production. Norway sells the other 90% to anyone who wants it. The US is a big buyer of North Sea oil. Thus, in recent years Norwegians have enjoyed unprecedented prosperity thanks to high oil prices. When it comes to managing their oil reserves, Norwegians do a good job. If the US had similar laws regarding the exploitation of our domestic oil reserves, we too would enjoy some of the same benefits mainly from paying Americans to get American oil from the ground to the consumer. The example of Norway should cause you to ask yourself why Iraq, Iran and Nigeria are overrun with poverty when there is so much oil money flowing into those countries?
BLACKkittenROAR Natasha:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:41:17
Its far from common knowledge. Im an Environmental Studies major, and a lot of what we cover includes issues of social justice and equity. I also have friends who live on reservations, and have witnessed the poverty in First Nations communities first hand.
J One should not also forget the Danish Colonial Empire that included Denmark/Norway that were in the Caribbean & Africa http://www.statemaster.com/encyclopedia/Danish-colonial-empire
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:50:43
BLACKkittenROAR on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 17:57:44 J: Very true. I think if you are to look closely at any of the wealthier nations, you will find links to a colonial past of some sorts. I believe that this is because a feature of development is that it relies on underdevelopment of a satellite nation.
no_slappz abagond, you wrote:
on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 20:59:43
1.Land: The largest piece of virgin farm land in the world as of 1500, more farm land than in all of China! White Americans took it from Native Americans at low cost. News flash. The Natives had no claim to the land that Colonists were obliged to honor. That may sound harsh, but thats reality. You wrote: 2.Labour: at cut rates from people of colour: slaves, coolies, migrant workers, Mexican nannies and landscapers, etc. Employers are in business to prosper. Not to go broke making others happy. Other than slaves, workers have always had the CHOICE of accepting or rejecting job offers. The chief cause of GMs
6 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
bankruptcy was its high wage and benefit structure. The United Autoworkers Union dug its own grave. You wrote: Blacks are still markedly underpaid even when you take education into account. Yeah. They get the worst deals imaginable when they sign contracts to play basketball, football, baseball and box. They get raw deals on those recording contracts and they get lousy compensation when they appear in movies and on TV. Its terrible. You wrote: 3.Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans Britains wealth was handed to white Americans to fight Hitler? WWHHAATT? Where did you get that whopper?
tulio on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 21:43:20 I think the primary reason any country gets rich, and more importantly stays rich is due to a high level of human capital. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_capital Human capital refers to the stock of competences, knowledge and personality attributes embodied in the ability to perform labor so as to produce economic value. It is the attributes gained by a worker through education and experience. High human capital = high productivity = wealth. I think the formula is pretty much the same anywhere. Maybe the exception are countries with vast natural resources to exploit, like the Gulf States where they can have great wealthy by luck of floating on a bed of oil and nothing more. Take away Saudi Arabias oil it would be another Afghanistan.
Uncle Milton on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 22:01:53 Labour: at cut rates from people of colour: slaves, coolies, migrant workers, Mexican nannies and landscapers, etc. Blacks are still markedly underpaid even when you take education into account. Then it would follow then that Portugal should be the richest country in western Europe since it dominated the slave trade for almost 2 centuries. (and thus per capita derived more money than any other European country from the slave trade and from its colonies in Macau, East Timor, Mozambique, Brazil, Angola, Goa, etc) Instead it is the poorest country in Western Europe deriving much of wealth from German and British tourists. Also as colonies go, Brazil derived even more of its money from slavery and had slaves for 20 years longer than the US yet it has substantially less money than the US.
7 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
siditty on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 22:06:11 I love this post because people so often forget that this is how America (read white people) typically accrued money in this country.
Hathor on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 22:18:22 America was lucky to fight its last wars on other peoples land. WWI and WWII would have cost the US, if its cities and industrial complexes had been in ruins. America was also fortunate to get the better scientist just before and after WWII. no_slappz, I wonder if you really think it is a choice of working and not working. I dont think that you ever had a choice between working and starvation. There is quite a substantial difference between an auto workers salary and someone who nailed railroad ties in the ground in the 19th century. That is adjusting for cost of living in the different time period. I also have yet to see what the upper level management did to deserve their salaries and bonuses, which was quite a big difference between the auto worker in the same time period. Dont try to flim flam me, I have observed and I am not stupid or ignorant that I cant see through to those CEO Clothes. I always find it very interesting when a professional from the CATO Institute argues that a laborer as an individual can negotiate their wages as a professional. It seems that this is where you have gotten your taking points.
ColorofLuv on Fri 26 Feb 2010 at 23:17:10 Also, my VP who was Black and female probably made 5 times what I made, yet I reported directly to her. The CEO (on the technological side) of the company I worked for at the time was of Afro-Caribbean origin and from the UK.) As I stated before, I loved and respected my boss. She was the best damn boss Ive ever had and that even includes people I reported to in the Military!!! Your comments that white people tell lies and think black people are stupid is certainly not true in my case!!! Did you realize there are actually some black people that tell lies and think white people are stupid? (obviously the color of ones skin does not make anybody liars or stupid)
Uncle Milton To Tulio:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 00:32:03
I think the primary reason any country gets rich, and more importantly stays rich is due to a high level of human capital. Yep, those are my thoughts also Moving away from White countries look at resource poor but economically rich Japan versus
8 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
resource rich (for many decades the largest exporter of rice..) but economically poor Thailand or economically rich and resource poor (almost zero..) Singapore versus much poorer economically Malaysia which is resource rich. The differences in the examples above would seem to be almost entirely explained by the differences in human capital.
B. R. on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 01:30:52 I think facing the facts we know ( like if a white person and black person aply for the same job or try to get the same apartment ,the white guy will get it), there is no doubt that white people have huge advantages in certain areas, even with laws on the books. But some of these huge wealth and power empires that were built off western expansion and profits from slavery, were rober barons, walking over everyone in their path. They did not share the wealth with other whites. The recent financial crisis is a perfect example of a few huge money people exploiting many people and they tried to take it too far and who gets hurt is every one else but espcialy minorities as unempoyment statistics show. Whites account for more poverty in the USA than blacks. Of course percentage wise is a differant story. I do beleive there are busineses that were built independent of exploitation of any one that through hard work and fullfiling a need of that product at that time, became succesful enterprises. Its not like a special club of whites where once you get in, every one is handshakes and winks and help on the way to riches.Ive been ripped off by whites in my business worse than any black person ever did to me. It is dog eat dog no matter what. The market place is cruel to everyone but of course, racism has sadled blacks with huge handicaps to overcome, and some have, quite handily.And history is replete with plenty of examples of white cruelty and exploitation to walk over the backs of everyone to get their wealth, and it is passed down generation to generation.
Uncle Milton To Abagond and no_slappz Abagond said:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 02:33:33
3.Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans no_slappz said: Britains wealth was handed to white Americans to fight Hitler? WWHHAATT? Where did you get that whopper? Abagond is probably thinking of the Lend-Lease program: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lend-Lease Although there were some initial transfer of wealth from the Soviets and the British for the most part
9 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
the US ended up giving most of the equipment to its allies at a substantial loss: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/4757181.stm In a nutshell, everything we got from America in World War II was free, says economic historian Professor Mark Harrison, of Warwick University. The post-war loan was part-driven by the Americans termination of the scheme. Under the programme, the US had effectively donated equipment for the war effort, but anything left over in Britain at the end of hostilities and still needed would have to be paid for. In addition after the war the Soviets basically said that given their enormous sacrifice (reasonable given their loss of 27 million people..) against the Germans they had no intention of repaying their debt to the US. Net net.. the expenditures by the US government in WWII were very large. from fighting the Japanese in the Pacific and fighting the Germans in Europe and the post war occupation of Japan and Germany and the financial aid to much of Western Europe and certainly exceeded any financial remuneration they received from the British empire. What was gained was a modern industrial infrastructure with basically almost no competition for one and half decades. (In 1953 the US produced 75% of the worlds industrial items)
tulio on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 03:25:02 I think facing the facts we know ( like if a white person and black person aply for the same job or try to get the same apartment ,the white guy will get it), there is no doubt that white people have huge advantages in certain areas, even with laws on the books. Jimmy Walker, yes of Good Times fame who in his later years became an outspoken Republican actually made a great case in favor of affirmative action, which he deemed a necessary evil. Due to the fact that 90% of all jobs are not advertised and only found through word of mouth and social connections, and given that most whites are socially close only to other whites, that it will put blacks at a disadvantage. He made a good point. The best paying and most rewarding jobs are not advertised in the classified, they are through referrals. Since whites have traditionally had the best jobs and most positions of power, when jobs open up, they are most likely to fill it through word of mouth rather than something democratic like a job ad. If fact when I think about it, whenever the boss needed to bring in more help, they would ask, do you know anyone that would be good for this position? They will do that before they advertise the job. So even if companies were 100% non-racist in hiring, this still presents a problem since society is still socially segregated and the best jobs are found through social networking(where race place a factor in who you know).
no_slappz hathor, you wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 04:02:15
America was lucky to fight its last wars on other peoples land. WWI and WWII would have cost the US, if its cities and industrial complexes had been in ruins.
10 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
America and by extension, the entire world would have been far more fortunate if Germany and Japan had abandoned their imperial goals and engaged in no wars in the 20th century. However, the US has benefited from its location on the globe and the bodies of water around us. You wrote: America was also fortunate to get the better scientist just before and after WWII. Yes. The US attracts and produces the greatest human capital. You wrote: no_slappz,I wonder if you really think it is a choice of working and not working. I dont think that you ever had a choice between working and starvation. It has been a long, long time since anyone in the US faced starvation. Today we have an obesity problem. The US is not the Sudan. You wrote: There is quite a substantial difference between an auto workers salary and someone who nailed railroad ties in the ground in the 19th century. Thank god for the automobile. The golden age of railroad construction is over. Burlington Northern may add more miles of track, but future increases will never approach the rate seen in the 19th century. But car production will soar. Too bad a lot of the manufacturing will occur outside the US. You wrote: I also have yet to see what the upper level management did to deserve their salaries and bonuses, which was quite a big difference between the auto worker in the same time period. Dont try to flim flam me, I have observed and I am not stupid or ignorant that I cant see through to those CEO Clothes. The UAW should have bought GM years ago. Then the union would have only itself to blame for the companys collapse. Actually managing the company would have made it clear to the union that management takes skill. But, in fact, the UAW understood this reality. Thats why the union was never willing to buy all the common stock and run the show, then distribute all the profits to the union members.
11 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Eurasian Sensation @ no_slappz you wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 07:11:23
News flash. The Natives had no claim to the land that Colonists were obliged to honor. That may sound harsh, but thats reality. WHAT?!?!?!?!?!? Dude, that is ridiculous, even for you.
leigh204 @Eurasian Sensation: WHAT?!?!?!?!?!? Dude, that is ridiculous, even for you. Were talking about no_slappz here. lol! Ridiculous is his middle name.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 07:16:00
Eurasian Sensation @leigh204:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 07:22:02
I know, but still that surprised me. No one can be that ideologically blinded, surely. Or maybe they can.
leigh204 @Eurasian Sensation:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 07:28:31
He reminds me of those types who are too stubborn for their own good no matter what.
leigh204 on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 07:34:26 Anyway, we have to try to keep it on the down low. We wouldnt want Mr. Ridiculous, overinflated sense of self to think anything he says is actually worth discussing, now would we?
Hathor no_slappz, It has been a long, long time since anyone in the US faced starvation. You need to pay attention and get out more in the US.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 13:05:51
Natasha W
12 of 79
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 13:41:29
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
^^LOL. Truly amazing. Thanks, Hathor for quoting that or else I wouldnt have read it. That has to be up there for one of the dumbest statements ever made on this blog.
leigh204 @Natasha W: lol! Consider the source. Haha.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 13:45:17
Mira @Abagond
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 13:59:12
If White Americans read what I write and clearly some do that is great. At least they have heard what I have to say even if they utterly disagree. Maybe it will make more sense to them down the road. But in the main I do not write for them. I know you dont write for them, but I cant help thinking it would be great to have white Americans read it and hear their responses. I dont think white Americans (or whites in general) read this blog or offer their comments, which is something that surprises me. There are a few of them, but only a few, and, sadly, comments are often less than constructive.
no_slappz hathor, I wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:03:17
It has been a long, long time since anyone in the US faced starvation. You responded: You need to pay attention and get out more in the US. You seem to be among the misinformed or the uncomprehending people who think starvation is the same as hungry. For various reasons there are some people in the US who do not get enough to eat. BUT there is NO starvation. However, since you believe otherwise, you should give me an example of someone in America who starved to death in the last 100 years. I suppose you can find an example of some crazy person who chained his child to a radiator and refused to feed him. But aside from a case like that, in the US there is NO STARVATION.
Natasha W Mira
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:16:09
My SO reads this blog from time to time. He doesmt feel the need to comment. He is slightly
13 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
put off by the generalizations made about white people, like 95 percent of white people are racist, and he thinks if I keep reading this blog I will end up hating white people and leave him (never!). And he is probably one of the more open-minded white people Ive met, if not the most. So I think sometimes white people may not like the general tone of the blog or they might be hesitant to comment.
no_slappz eurasian sensation, I wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:22:19
News flash. The Natives had no claim to the land that Colonists were obliged to honor. That may sound harsh, but thats reality. You responded: WHAT?!?!?!?!?!? Dude, that is ridiculous, even for you. You really need to grasp the concept that until relatively recently, control of land went to those with the biggest guns. You can pretend to be aghast at the ways of the world, but the facts are the facts for centuries, the face of the world was changed by conquest, starting with the earliest moments in recorded history. Now that the entire planet is settled and sovereignty has been established, there are no new lands to conquer. These days, only minor border changes occur. Not long ago Yugoslavia was one country. Now it is three. There was West Germany and East Germany following WWII. Now there is only Germany. Meanwhile, during WWII Russia seized the Karelia, part of Finland. A region rich in natural resources. Finland is still waiting for the return of this real estate. Iraq rolled into Kuwait and seized it, but was able to hold it only briefly. The USSR was one nation comprising many republics. Now all the former soviet republics are independent nations. The establishment of almost every nation in the middle east was handled by the British in the first half of the 20th century. Before that, the entire region was like Afghanistan wild and ungoverned. You really need to understand the history of humanity was, for a few centuries, largely about the projection of force around the globe. Then, in the second half of the 20th century, it became much more about trade. But with nuclear weapons falling into the hands of the crackpot Iranians, projecting power around the planet will return to its priority role.
no_slappz uncle milton,
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:26:52
If abagond was thinking of the Lend-Lease program which I doubt then, as usual, he got
14 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
the story all wrong. He seems to have a reflex that causes him to conclude any action involving the white power structures of the US is corrupt, criminal and racist.
Hathor NO-slappz, Since you want to parse the language.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:29:00
Look up the definition and understand the logical difference of the use of or.
Thad OK, so heres a question.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:29:40
If slavery is so immensely profitable, why isnt Brazil a superpower by now? We were undeniably the largest slave-based economy in the Americas. So.?
no_slappz abagond, I have two ideas for you. How about two more Thought Experiments?
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:30:05
Try this one. What would Africa be like today if whites had never colonized the continent? Heres another idea. What would the world be like today if black slaves had never been shipped to the West?
no_slappz hathor, As I said, in the US there is NO STARVATION.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:33:48
Are there hungry people? Yes. But NO ONE in this country is in danger of starving to death. Like I said, we have an obesity problem, and it is most obvious in the minority population the poorest segment of America.
no_slappz on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:43:17 Thad is correct, if slavery correlates directly with national wealth, why is Brazil still a third-world nation? Obviously national wealth is the result of human productivity. But slaves have almost no value in an economy that depends on advanced skills and education.
15 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Moreover, virtually every function slaves once performed can now be handled by machines that are many times more efficient and much less costly than human workers. The Industrial Revolution and mandatory education of children made the difference. Of course the nature of the education makes a big difference. I get the feeling that too many blacks believe that by studying enough black history, somehow that activity will produce competent black scientists and engineers. Unfortunately, until blacks overcome their general aversion to science and math, Africa and other largely black regions will remain economic backwaters dependent on the goodwill of white nations.
Mira @Natasha W
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 14:50:31
So I think sometimes white people may not like the general tone of the blog or they might be hesitant to comment. True. Well, all the websites get much more general hits than comments, and yes, I guess white people do visit this blog, but choose not to comment. However, while there are many generalizations here, Abagonds blog is very well written and it does seem like a place that offers an opportunity for a discussion and benefit of the doubt. As for generalizations, I think there are much more generalizations about women than about the white people (though I might be biased here- I identify myself more as being a woman than being white, so maybe I dont pay that much attention on stereotypes about white people).
Natasha W Mira
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 15:11:47
As for generalizations, I think there are much more generalizations about women than about the white people (though I might be biased here- I identify myself more as being a woman than being white, so maybe I dont pay that much attention on stereotypes about white people). I arrived here a little before the end of last year and I liked the blog, so I decided to begin reading it from the beginning. I noticed as time went along, posts about women became less and less frequent, and the posts regarding race relations became more frequent. These posts are also more popular as far as comments, and some of the commenters have strong views on these issues.
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:08:04 I would guess that most white people, having no ecuation about racism at all veyond what the Disney Channel feeds them, dont comment because they feel insulted.
16 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:09:37 Actually, theres a reason the U.S. got rich off of slavery and Brazil did not, but I wonder if anyone else around here knows it.
Hathor No_slappz,
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:11:11
Starvation does not mean absolute death. It can mean to suffer from hunger. What on earth do mean that the African has an aversion to science an math? You have absolutely no proof. Or is this a projection? Perhaps because I am a woman, I havent seen any employer care if you are good at science and math unless you can claim the magic Negro title. They will hire you , but it wont advance you. It seems the more you are a critical thinker, the more you are seen as a disruptive negro. Heaven forbid if you can out think their Wunderkind. That puts you in the backwater. There is a lot of innovation taking place in Africa. Just not on the scale that would satisfy your market friends.
abagond @ Mira and Natasha W:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:26:29
I think Thad is right: some of what I say turns off white people. I could guard my words and maybe get more white commenters but that would go against my philosophy of writing.
Mira @Thad
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:29:17
I would guess that most white people, having no ecuation about racism at all veyond what the Disney Channel feeds them, dont comment because they feel insulted. Thad, I understand youre an atheist (agnostic?), so I get your comments about God. But Disney???
Do you truly believe it has THAT much influence on Americans like religion? Or perhaps you mean on something more general? Also, Abagonds posts are much less insulting than one might expect from this type of blogs, so I really dont get. If I were a white American wanting to discuss race issues, Id definitely choose this blog to comment. @Natasha W Now that you mentioned it, there seems to be less and less posts about women. I wonder why. Not that I miss those posts. (Even though I must admit I didnt mind them as much as Id like to mind them- as a thick woman, something in me liked the fact hes talking very positively about given body shape And yes, I am ashamed of that, but if were honest here (we are, arent we?), I must admit
17 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
it).
Natasha W on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:31:37 abagond, yes, I know. If my SO is offended, I could only imagine what most white peope are thinking when they read this blog. I could imagine many dont come back after their first visit.
leigh204 @abagond:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:36:35
I think Thad is right: some of what I say turns off white people. I could guard my words and maybe get more white commenters but that would go against my philosophy of writing. Agreed. The posters I find, who happen to be white people, who totally get what youre saying are Mira and Macon D. Im sure there are others, but they dont come to mind right now. They have a better understanding of where youre coming from. Others just blow it off.
abagond on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:38:04 Brazil used to be richer than America, at least if you go by exports. That was in the 1700s when the big money was in sugar. BUT most of the money made by Brazilian slaves went to Europe, not to Brazil. Brazil was a colony, remember. What makes America different is that while the South was a colony in the style of Haiti or Brazil a big money-making operation for the benefit of Europe the North, particularly New England, was not. Whites came to New England not to get rich but to start the world over again according to their religion. It was just what it called itself: a NEW England. A new England planted in North America. And so its game was very different: it wanted to take control of the trade between America and England, not merely take part in it. Which it did in time. And so more of the profits from slave labour stayed inside America than was the case with Brazil. The North made money not just from the trade in tobacco and cotton but earlier from the trade in slaves.
Natasha W Mira,
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:39:20
Also, Abagonds posts are much less insulting than one might expect from this type of blogs, so I really dont get. If I were a white American wanting to discuss race issues, Id definitely choose this blog to comment. What do you mean this type of blog? When I came here I wasnt under the impression that this was a blog solely for discussing race and racial issues, and many of the initial posts werent on these topics. Now that you mentioned it, there seems to be less and less posts about women. I wonder why. Not that I miss those posts. (Even though I must admit I didnt mind them as much as Id like to mind them- as a thick woman, something in me liked the fact hes talking very positively about given body
18 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
shape And yes, I am ashamed of that, but if were honest here (we are, arent we?), I must admit it). Lol, he can leave out the posts about women. I had to give my SO the side-eye one time I saw him ogling a photo of Toccara Jones from abagonds post on her.
abagond on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:41:52 Brazil and virgin farm land: it had some too, of course, but America had nearly three times more.
abagond Leigh said:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:55:55
Agreed. The posters I find, who happen to be white people, who totally get what youre saying are Mira and Macon D. Im sure there are others, but they dont come to mind right now. They have a better understanding of where youre coming from. Others just blow it off. LMAO. Mira is not White American or even Anglo, so she has no racist white pride to defend: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/white-pride/ As for Macon D, for a while I thought he was Adam Mansbach: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/adam-mansbach/
abagond on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 16:59:22 I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a money-losing operation.
abagond Natasha W said:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 17:02:29
abagond, yes, I know. If my SO is offended, I could only imagine what most white peope are thinking when they read this blog. I could imagine many dont come back after their first visit. Wow, worse than I thought.
Mira @Natasha W What do you mean this type of blog?
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 17:10:11
Good question. I guess by this type of blog I meant blog discussing race issues. Youre right: many posts are not about race (or women for that matter), but the first ones I found were about race issues. (I found the site vie Google search, I think the exact search was white men and black
19 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
women- I wanted to see why that combination is considered less common than white woman/black man one).
Natasha W on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 17:23:24 abagond, its because they dont want to feel like bad people. And this blog makes them feel that way. It makes them feel guilty and uncomfortable to read all these posts and comments about white people. Of those that dont feel guilty, many probably think you are blowing issues out of proportion. So you just get the white supremacists to comment. Although I do recall a white female commenter from days past called Dedabets. I wonder where she went. Mira, I came here via Google too. I searched for race and dating, and came upon the Columbia University study post. But, interestingly enough, I wasnt googling regarding my relationship, but because of a comment that one of our white male friends made, Im not attracted to black women. Period. Its a preference. Ive heard such comments before, but never so bluntly, so I decided to see what the general consensus was.
leigh204 @abagond: LMAO.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 17:24:37
Mira is not White American or even Anglo, so she has no racist white pride to defend: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2009/12/29/white-pride/ As for Macon D, for a while I thought he was Adam Mansbach: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2008/05/09/adam-mansbach/ Understood. My point is, Mira and Macon D are not your typical white commenters arguing for the sake of arguing.
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:20:21 I could guard my words and maybe get more white commenters but that would go against my philosophy of writing. Why bother? It aint like theyre gonna listen anyhow. :/
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:22:47 Do you truly believe it has THAT much influence on Americans like religion? Or perhaps you mean on something more general? Well, not THAT much more general. Youd be surprised to learn how many edutainment pies Disney has thumbs in. Two words which will help illustrate this point: Touchstone Pictures.
20 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
But in general, I mean a happy all thats in the past now kind of gloss on racism.
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:31:35 The posters I find, who happen to be white people, who totally get what youre saying areMira and Macon D. Sorry. I find Macon D to be a bit of an agony sister. Hes not an educator: it seems to me that hes ascribed to himself the role of white man who knows all there is to know about other white peoples racism and chooses to use that role to shake his finger at white people he thinks are acting poorly. Thats a very comfortable position for him to be in, especially as its anonymous. I dont think he can even conceive of discussing race with someone whose ideas dont match his, which in terms of fighting racism makes him something of a zero to the left of the decimal point. Also, Macons site to me seems to be simply a listing o memes regarding race. Discussion becomes a sort of competition between who can cite said memes quiskest and fastest. The discussion were having about the Irish, for example, is a very crucial piece of the racism puzzle for me, white trash being traditionally considered degenerate in racial terms and the Irish being the epitome of this. This discussion would neveroccur over on Macons site because someone would simply say Oh, the Irish as slaves argument! Shut up, you evil racist you! and that would be that. I think Macon believes that he knows all there is to know about race and that hes one hell of a white guy for being that way. I could never imagine Macon, for example, saying one single thing about race that doesnt follow a closely scripted line which involves clear-cut good guys and clear-cut bad guys.
Natasha W on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:37:59 Thad, I never got that impression from Macon D. He seemed fairly open-minded. Then again, I was never a regular of his blog and only heard about it via this blog.
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:38:55 Abagond sez: Brazil used to be richer than America, at least if you go by exports. That was in the 1700s when the big money was in sugar. BUT most of the money made by Brazilian slaves went to Europe, not to Brazil. Brazil was a colony, remember. As was the U.S. in the 1700s, remember. Brazil became effectively independent in 1809, 20 years after the U.S. Length of the colonial period thus wasnt the problem here. What makes America different is that while the South was a colony in the style of Haiti or Brazil a big money-making operation for the benefit of Europe the North, particularly New England, was not. Whites came to New England not to get rich but to start the world over again according to their religion. It was just what it called itself: a NEW England. A new England planted in North America. And so its game was very different: it wanted to take control of the trade between America and England, not merely take part in it. Which it did in time. And so more of the profits from slave labour
21 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
stayed inside America than was the case with Brazil. Exactly. I hate to say this, but No_Slappz is fundamentally correct, Abagond: outside of a few very special circumstances, slavery pretty much is a money-loser over the medium and long-term. Money loser to the slave owners, that is. There are excellent sociological and economic reasons for this, the main one being that it is far more economically rational to purchase labor power than the laborers themselves. The people who make money on slavery are the merchants: the folks who sell the slaves and sell the slave owners all their consumable goods. The folks who buy the output of the plantations and transform it into industrial goods. In the case of the U.S., the North AS WELL as Britain fulfilled this role, so the country itself became rich well the south basically bled itself dry or would have if slavery had gone on much longer. In Brazil, everything went to the Brits and this was long before independence. Many Brazilian economists, in fact, claim that it was Brazilian gold which financed the British industrial revolution. Thats quite plausible, seeing as how the economic movement between Brazil and Britain in the early 19th century was 4 or 5 times larger than the movement between Britain and the entire Indian subcontinent.
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:45:49 This is one of the problems with the White are _____ thesis, which weve argued about back and forth ever since I showed up here. There are a series of different structural positions within slavery and, later, racism and they all need to be filled in order for the machine to work. Cursing all whites as, essentially, slaveholders edits out the class and intra-ethnic struggles which were going on and which, in fact, made some of the more ugly aspects of racism possible. By situating poor free whites (who were rarely free in any substantial sense of the word) as superior to blacks, the folks who really made hay off the slavery system were able to keep the game going by assuring an essentially split laboring class. Racism only makes useful political and sociological sense when its integrated into a world view that sees its intersections with all the other isms: sexism and classism in particular. Without that kind of intersectionalist view, anti-racism loses any revolutionary potential in might have and becomes just another form of petite-bourgeosie moaning about rights as if any rights actually existed independent of our political and economic system.
Mira on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 18:50:16 True, true, Disney is everywhere and it does shape many peoples opinions, all over the world. I must admit I like some of their animated movies (I know, I know). Luckily, I think I didnt understand them when I was a kid- so the potential way they shaped MY opinions might not be so bad. But I dont think its just about Disney. They are powerful, but not THAT powerful. Theyre obviously
22 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
making and selling something people were ready to buy because that was something they already believed in, or an image they already had about themselves.
Mira on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 19:21:55 Speaking of non-racist whites (those 5% or so, according to Abagond ), I do think theres some sort of competition to prove your anti-racism. Nothing wrong in being anti-racist, we are all trying to be that (arent we?), but to push that as some sort of proving how generally good and nice person you are- I think its pointless and bad and missing the point. If you want to have a non-white friend (or boyfriend) to show that black people like you- thats bad and youre missing the point. If you go to race or black blogs to hear black people tell you youre not a racist- thats bad and youre missing the point. In other words, if you discuss these issues not because of the issues, but to get approval from non-white people and an anti-racist gold medalthats bad and youre missing the point. Its not really about you. Even if you truly arent racist, it doesnt mean anybody should talk about it- its not really that important. So, as much as I appreciate leighs comment about me not being a typical white commenter, I dont think I should be proud of it. I mean, I am glad someone said a nice thing about me (at least I see its meant to be a nice thing- correct me if Im wrong), but it doesnt really make me proud in a way ooooh, non-white people like me and my comments, so that means I am really not a racist, so it means Im a nice person. Yes, I am being sarcastic, but sometimes I do think white people are desperate to be called non-racists, as if that is the most important thing when discussing race issues. Being non-racist doesnt really mean youre a good person. Sure, ones lack of racism is a good thing, but you can still be a bad human being for all we know. I am not sure if the opposite is possible (to be a racist but otherwise decent human)- but Im trying to say being anti-racist doesnt automatically make you a good person. (Not to mention that commenting on a race blog doesnt really make you anti-racist in the first place).
dimples on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 19:34:16 They were criminals when they came. Europeans cast those criminals out of Europe. They did not come as hard working people. They came as manipulaters, rapist, murders, and robbers.
no_slappz mira, you wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 19:36:37
I do think white people are desperate to be called non-racists, as if that is the most important thing when discussing race issues. If you really believe this, you are woefully out of touch. Most white Americans have almost zero contact with blacks, and therefore devote almost zero time to considering racial issues.
Jamaicafest on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 19:48:17 Abagond said: My grandfather came to America with $25 in his pocket), they are forgetting even that little
23 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
bit of history: if hard work and the right values were enough, then why on earth did their forefathers leave Europe to live the rest of their lives in a foreign land across the ocean? Because they knew that hard work and the right values were not enough in themselves, not by a long shot. Many European countries were very rigidly class bound so people were unable to achieve social mobility even if they were willing to work hard and had the right values. America is not as class bound as Europe was and therefore people were able to find opportunities to progress regardless of their status. To further illustrate my point, I live in Jamaica which is still a rigidly class bound society where social connections determine ones ability to achieve success. My grandparents ex-gardener (a black Jamaican) went to Florida in the 1980s and started buying old houses, fixing them up and selling at a profit. He owns a house with a swimming pool and a Mercedes Benz. In all likelihood he would not attained this kind of upward mobility had he stayed in Jamaica.
leigh204 @Mira:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 19:54:37
From what I have read of a lot of your comments on abagonds blog, you seem (to me) that youre sincere and respectful when responding to others. I also like how you ask genuine questions to increase your understanding regarding peoples experiences/views. Your contributions to this blog are much appreciated.
no_slappz Hathor, you wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 20:04:35
Starvation does not mean absolute death. It can mean to suffer from hunger. Keep trying. The US is not the Sudan. In this country there are no swollen bellies sticking out of undernourished kids. I repeat, in the US we have an OBESITY problem. You asked: What on earth do mean that the African has an aversion to science an math? You have absolutely no proof. No proof? Really. Virtually no blacks pursue careers in science or engineering. Almost no blacks get Phds in a long list of technical areas. The avoidance starts early. Math SAT scores of black students are significantly lower than math scores of whites and asians. Moreover, blacks are less likely than whites and asians to take the SAT and graduate from college. Hence the math/science weakness is understated. You wrote: Perhaps because I am a woman, I havent seen any employer care if you are good at science and math unless you can claim the magic Negro title. Oh. Your statement makes it clear that even you believe no blacks enter the fields of science or
24 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
engineering. Otherwise, you would realize that, if a person were an engineer or scientist, his knowledge of science and math would be crucial. You wrote: They will hire you , but it wont advance you. It seems the more you are a critical thinker, the more you are seen as a disruptive negro. Heaven forbid if you can out think their Wunderkind. That puts you in the backwater. Apparently you believe scientists and engineers merely devote their days to pounding round pegs into round holes. You wrote: There is a lot of innovation taking place in Africa. False. Unfortunately, Africans have proven they are unable to re-invent the wheel. Moreover, the thug leaders are ensuring the continuation of staggering infant mortality rates and the unchecked spread of most water-borne diseases problems that were long ago overcome in the white world. You wrote: Just not on the scale that would satisfy your market friends. Scale is not the issue. It is the utter lack of innovation that is the problem. Im still waiting for news of that first prosperous and educated black nation, where there are scientists, engineers, doctors, lawyers, professors, world-class colleges, companies manufacturing advanced goods and clean drinking water for everyone in the country. Tell me why Nigeria cannot emulate Norway.
J Just to say, with regard to:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 20:22:25
the facts are the facts for centuries, the face of the world was changed by conquest, starting with the earliest moments in recorded history. Now that the entire planet is settled and sovereignty has been established, there are no new lands to conquer. These days, only minor border changes occur. Maybe not for Westerners etc, ie no new lands to conquer but for the likes of Muslims as per your blog etc there is also the possibilty of re-conquering. I am sure even you may have to concede this is a sort of dialectical process, which will probably go on for ever
25 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Hathor no_slappz, And you automatically assumed that I am a secretary.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 20:37:23
Hathor no-slappz, I am surprised you havent quoted Ann Coulter or William Shockley.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 20:43:53
no_slappz hathor, you wrote: And you automatically assumed that I am a secretary.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:19:01
I assumed exactly NOTHING about your employment. But like or not, your comment revealed plenty about your thoughts.
Herneith @Hathor: You need to pay attention and get out more in the US. How can he when hes holed up in a mental institution? @slappz:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:24:47
You seem to be among the misinformed or the uncomprehending people who think starvation is the same as hungry. Yes you are right. Last night I went to the local dumpster, dove in and managed to rustle up a meal, the things people throw away! It wasnt bad! I used a a lighter to cook the meal. But hey, I was starving, er no, I was hungry. For various reasons there are some people in the US who do not get enough to eat. Yes I wonder why? Not enough dumpsters I guess. Go to the rich areas, they throw out a lot of great food. Keep an eye out for the cops though. You really need to grasp the concept that until relatively recently, control of land went to those withthe biggest guns. Like in a John Wayne movie? You can pretend to be aghast at the ways of the world, but the facts are the facts for centuries, the face of the world was changed by conquest, starting with the earliest moments in recorded history. Two wrongs dont make a right but they sure as hell makes you even! Good advice! Im going to beat the sh$t out of my neighbour! He keeps throwing garbage onto my side of the property. When I go to
26 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
court, that will be my defense. Looky here Judge, that gearbox keeps throwing garbage onto my property, why last week I was almost decapitated by a plexi-glass sun window when it dislodged and flew off his roof! According to Mr. slappz, I can take actions as vigilantism has been around since forever as had murder, pillaging and rapine! I am only conquering his ability to throw garbage onto my property! Of course Ill appeal my conviction, wish me luck! Before that, the entire region was like Afghanistan wild and ungoverned. That sounds romantic! I bet they could get many best selling bodice rippers out of that! Plenty of talk of his mighty sword! He seems to have a reflex that causes him to conclude any action involving the white power structures of the US is corrupt, criminal and racist. No, it is his sphincter reflex when reading your posts! It induces gaseous responses in him as it does others. It is indicative of what you are full of as it elicits these physical responses as well as unremitting laughter. It is no mistake that you take on the moniker slappz, you are a laugh a minute and a half! Thanks. Try this one. What would Africa be like today if whites had never colonized the continent? What would you be like if you were black? I know! You would be arguing the reverse! Moreover, virtually every function slaves once performed can now be handled by machines that are many times more efficient and much less costly than human workers. Like in the Transformer movies? No thanks! Thad is correct, if slavery correlates directly with national wealth, why is Brazil still a third-world nation? Only the phantom knows! Unfortunately, until blacks overcome their general aversion to science and math, Africa and other largely black regions will remain economic backwaters dependent on the goodwill of white nations Bring in the athletes with slappz as the coach! I am surprised you havent quoted Ann Coulter or William Shockley. Give him time!
Optimus on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:27:12 I agree with the statement that this blog is talking about the rich people in America (who have largely been white), and not about everyone. And it is true that probably all nations have a sordid history, but the rich ones (like America) are big targets for this sort of discussion (because a lot of people know about America). This blog is about some white Americans, and comments have derailed the discussion into a diatribe about black countries/people which has nothing to do with Abagonds assertionthis topic (rightly or wrongly) is about white Americans. I do think it is naive (at best) for anyone to claim they succeeded *all alone* using their trusty bootstraps when everyone has had assistance from someone (some had to hire that person for a job, someone
27 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
had to sell them a house, and a lot of times connections come from ones friends).
no_slappz hathor, you wrote: I am surprised you havent quoted Ann Coulter or William Shockley.
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:27:27
Coulter has a sharp wit and is remarkably accurate with many of her commentaries. Its interesting that you mention Shockley. When blacks drop his name, they seem to express the view that he was no more than the sum of his views on race. It is unlikely more than a few of his black critics know anything about his lifes work. Meanwhile, where are the black physicists? The black guys working on the next generation of semiconductors? By the way, if there were a starvation problem in the US, the National Geographic Magazine would have been all over it decades and decades ago. Along with Life, Look, Time, Newsweek, and every other media venue capable of stirring up a storm about suffering in the land of plenty. But even in the poorest, most remote and alienated parts of the US, everyone seems to eat.
Herneith on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:35:08 But even in the poorest, most remote and alienated parts of the US, everyone seems to eat. The dumpsters are full of tasty tidbits if you cant afford groceries. A lighter to heat up the food costs a dollar. There is also road kill for your protein requirements. I have heard that rat meat tastes like rabbit or chicken. You can cut off the rotted parts of the vegetables you get from the dumpster when making the rat stew! Sometimes a restaurant will give you throwaway food if nothing else but to get you the hell away from there as it is bad for business!
Natasha W on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:35:36 Herneith, LMAO. You always have me in stitches with your comments.
Optimus on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:37:05 I apologize Abagond if this is off topic. However, I have to say I dont think that black guys have to have a particular profession/job; thats part of having the freedom to employ oneself at whatever legal work one chooses. ***I know this post was about America so please delete if off topic***
Herneith @NatashaW:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:38:23
This man lends himself to ridicule. In fact I am grateful to him as he allows me to hone and refine my written comedic skills. thanks Slappz!
28 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
no_slappz J, you wrote:
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:40:25
Maybe not for Westerners etc, ie no new lands to conquer but for the likes of Muslims as per your blog etc there is also the possibilty of re-conquering. Muslims have no chance of re-conquering the world, though it is obvious that is the goal Islam. In short, few members of the modern world are willing to reverse course and turn back the clock to muhammads 7th Century. If Islam were to take the world to a brighter future, that might change things. But the muslim clowns would rather spread misery and backwardness. Fortunately, in all the ways that matter, muslims are incompetent. Iran may make the fatal mistake of attempting its own brand of nuclear mayhem which will subject it to a punishing Pyrrhic Loss. I think the question muslims are now debating is whether Obama, as a former muslim, is an apostate. Or will he re-emerge as one of muhammads followers? Hopefully Obamas softness on muslim lunacy, his socialist agenda, and his bungling of almost every one of his stated goals will bring about his defeat in 2012. Given his weakening support after only one year in office, it will take a lot for him to win re-election. You wrote: I am sure even you may have to concede this is a sort of dialectical process, which will probably go on for ever Yes, we can count on continued conflict. But more democracy and capitalism is the best way to reduce problems.
no_slappz herneith,
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:47:56
Even though you are attempting to ridicule me, I would laugh if you were able to deliver a funny crack. But you lack that talent. Heres a clue. Humor is best defined as a sense of the incongruous.
Herneith on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:49:13 I am sure even you may have to concede this is a sort of dialectical process, which will probably go on for ever Yes, we can count on continued conflict. But more democracy and capitalism is the best way to reduce problems.But even in the poorest, most remote and alienated parts of the US, everyone seems to eat. I think he is referring to your mode of argument, not the topic itself
29 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Herneith on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:52:27 Even though you are attempting to ridicule me, I would laugh if you were able to deliver a funny crack. But you lack that talent. Heres a clue. Humor is best defined as a sense of the incongruous. Why slappz, you have just described yourself to a t, incongruous!
J Thanks!!
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 21:54:18
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 22:50:23 Hopefully Obamas softness on muslim lunacy, his socialist agenda, and his bungling of almost every one of his stated goals will bring about his defeat in 2012. Given his weakening support after only one year in office, it will take a lot for him to win re-election. Actually, i almost agree with you. Obamas probably the most level-headed preisdent the U.S. has had for years. 8 years of Bush created two wars, isolation of the States from its traditional allies and an economic collapse thats bordering on a new great depression. I think 8 more years of Republicans would finally pretty much drive the United States into the ground, which would probably be overall a good thing for the rest of the world.
Thad on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 22:51:10 I mean, presuming that ones an anti-imperialist, voting Republican would seem to be the way to go.
Hathor no_slappz, Heres a clue. Humor is best defined as a sense of the incongruous. Are you admitting to being incongruous?
on Sat 27 Feb 2010 at 22:56:15
Since you know my thoughts, then you must know that they approach the truth differently that yours. I knew a Black physicist that was treated so badly that he decided to get a law degree. I knew Black students that were good in math and science, but looked to alternative careers, one even became a minister. You look at raw test scores and dont see the individuals who have the education, test scores, but choose not to be the first or the person that has to overcome the perceptions of being not good enough. There are a lot of Black people who are scientist, but are not celebrities, I have worked with them. The jobs they have are very mundane, doing repetitive analysis day after day. Among them are many white folk in the same bolt. Most scientist are not superstars or make the salaries of most MBAs. There isnt a lot of incentive to become a scientist, when a business degree is valued
30 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
more. Math people are getting IT degrees. I think that you know this and like being the unique Negro, so you have to be contrary.
peanut on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 02:06:28 greed is just something that has kept those in power in power. at the end of the day you can have all the material wealth and still be empty inside
Uncle Milton To Thad:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 04:13:55
Actually, theres a reason the U.S. got rich off of slavery and Brazil did not, but I wonder if anyone else around here knows it. Well the US Civil war sort of hit the reset button on the wealth from slaves. I have read that some of cities in the US South before the war were very wealthy. Lincoln offered to pay off the Southern slave holders (as the British did previously with Jamaica..) but the Southerners refused. They enjoyed their vile racket and the wealth it produced. As for the wealth sent to Britain by the slave trade, as Abagond acknowledged it was basically wiped out by WWII and as I have pointed it was not transferred to the US. Whatever wealth the Germans and Japanese had from their colonies (Germany had a few African colonies before WWI..) was wiped out by the devastating effects of WWI and WWII for Germany and WWII for Japan. To Abagond: Brazil used to be richer than America, at least if you go by exports. That was in the 1700s when the big money was in sugar. BUT most of the money made by Brazilian slaves went to Europe, not to Brazil. Brazil was a colony, remember. Brazil was a Portuguese colony in the 1700s so I would presume that the bulk of the money went to Portugal. (Thad said some money went to the British but in the 19th century went Brazil was independent) For all of the wealth that Portugal achieved through near monopolization of the slave trade for two centuries and its colonies seems to have dissipated since it is the poorest of Western European countries. I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a moneylosing operation. Is that comment directed at me..? If so I never said such a thing. Of course some people made money off slavery and the slave trade. What I do assert is that slavery (and its milder European variant serfdom) was a poor economic enterprise relative to other economic endeavors using paid labor. Moving away from White countries (ok maybe off-White..?) we can talk about Turkey, the heart of the Ottoman Empire which lasted longer than the British Empire. They had slaves, engaged in slave trading, demanded tribute from their vassals yet it ranks at the same level as Mexico in GDP per capita.
31 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Uncle Milton To Abagond:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 04:39:19
I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a money-losing operation. Who Started the Triangular Trade? For two hundred years, 1440-1640, Portugal had a monopoly on the export of slaves from Africa. It is notable that they were also the last European country to abolish the institution although, like France, it still continued to work former slaves as contract laborers, which they called libertos or engags temps. It is estimated that during the 4 1/2 centuries of the trans-Atlantic slave trade, Portugal was responsible for transporting over 4.5 million Africans (roughly 40% of the total). GDP Per capita: Western European countries never involved in the slave trade: 10 Finland 45,876 11 Austria 45,090 12 Sweden 43,147 Number 1 country (especially per capita) involved in the slave trade Portugal: Portugal 20,655 Dead last for Western Europe below the Bahamas and Slovenia. (That number is as high as it is because of Portugals admission to the EU..) Robbery (Gold) Pillage, Plunder, and Slavery may make some people in a country very rich but I think screws it up royally in the long run.
Uncle Milton To Thad:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 04:44:22
I mean, presuming that ones an anti-imperialist, voting Republican would seem to be the way to go. The US (in my opinion..) in heading for a protracted financial crisis as is the rest of the OECD. I just think Bush and company made things bubble up faster. A friend of mine who was running for mayor of his home town had a slogan that went This town is going to hell and I am to see it get there as fast a possible He placed third. I havent been in touch with him for a while maybe he went to work for the Bush administration.
J on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 13:08:33 The Swedish (including Finland) slave trade occurred in the early history of Sweden, and again during the 17th century, around the time Swedish overseas colonies were established in North America (1638) and in Africa (1650). It remained legal until 1813. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swedish_slave_trade
32 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Thad on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 14:09:45 Uncle Milton sez: Well the US Civil war sort of hit the reset button on the wealth from slaves. I have read that some of cities in the US South before the war were very wealthy. And every one of them was an import/export town where merchants were making bucks hand-over-fist. Its been very well shown, Milt, that slave-holders generally didnt do good for themselves. Here in brazil, it was the importers and exporters that made up our first capitalist class. They were concentrated in Rio de Janeiro, another wealthy port town. Slavery is basically clearcutting in the forest of economic activity. It can make some cash in the short run, but even over the mid term, it falls apart when it comes up against wage-based systems of labor. Brazil was a Portuguese colony in the 1700s so I would presume that the bulk of the money went to Portugal. (Thad said some money went to the British but in the 19th century went Brazil was independent) If you really look into Brazilian colonial economics, youll see that what happened is that the wealth went to Portugual, which immediately used it to pay off staggering trade deficits with Britain. Check out the Metheun Treaty (Wikis take on it is predictably pro-English however): http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Methuen_Treaty Robbery (Gold) Pillage, Plunder, and Slavery may make some people in a country very rich but Ithink screws it up royally in the long run. Basically correct, though Portugal had other problems, too. Even today in the U.S., the southern ex-slave-holding states are generally the nations poorest.
no_slappz thad, you wrote:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 14:10:44
Obamas probably the most level-headed preisdent the U.S. has had for years. 8 years of Bush created two wars, isolation of the States from its traditional allies and an economic collapse thats bordering on a new great depression. Only someone with no knowledge of finance, economics, the last 40 years of US history, mixed with the capacity to believe Bushs response to 9/11 was wrong can call Obama level-headed. Obama, the former muslim, is beginning to look like the Manchurian Candidate.
no_slappz abagond, you wrote:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 14:35:55
I find it curious how white commenters seem to have this strange need to see slavery as a money-losing operation.
33 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
As Ive said, you really really need a course in economics. Slavery was profitable at times, and it was profitable for various participants in the Africa-to-plantation chain. But that does NOT mean it was profitable for every participant at all times. Moreover, people make financial mistakes all the time. In recent years people bought homes expecting them to appreciate almost immediately. Instead, over the last couple of years, prices have dropped. But the real estate brokers and mortgage issuers were paid, nonetheless. Of course the number of realtors and the number of mortgages issued in the last two years have declined. a lot. Is there any meaningful difference between the roles of realtors and mortgage brokers versus their counterparts in the slave trade? These days every buyer is thinking he may be purchasing his home at the bottom of real estate market. Eventually, we will pass the bottom and prices will begin to climb. But till then buyers may see the value of their homes slip. Today, buyers and operators of businesses are in the same boat. Thats the same boat they were in during era of slavery. How many industries that once formed the basis of major US fortunes are greatly diminished or no longer exist? All you have to do is look at the changing names in the 30 companies included in the Dow Jones Industrial Average to get the answer. The Dow is about 110 years old and the only company in it today that was in it from the beginning is General Electric. Microsoft is a Dow stock. The company is less than 30 years old and has been a public stockholder-owned company for less than 25 years. But it appears that Microsoft has passed its prime and the day is coming when another smart guy from Harvard or MIT will create the company that knocks Microsoft out of its place in the Dow. The forces of economics make this change inevitable, just like the changes that eventually made slavery unprofitable.
no_slappz thad,
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 14:51:37
Obama IS a former muslim. He was born to a muslim father. According to Islamic tradition, that means he was born a muslim. He lived in Indonesia a muslim nation, by law during his formative years, and while there he attended a muslim school. Since the state religion of Indonesia is Islam, that means he was going to school in an Islamic environment. No one at ages 8 to 12 escapes the psychological effects of complete immersion in his society. Kids are impressionable. They absorb lunacy without question, as all religions demand. Anyway, Obama has not drifted too far from his Islamic roots. Nominally he became a Christian. But
34 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
he picked Reverend Wright for his spiritual leader. Wright is a muslim in Christian robes. Wright made his position clear with his repeated praise for Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam. As for demonstrations of his sympathies for Islam, it is painfully clear in his approach to Israel and the so-called Palestinians, as well as in his goals for the US role in the middle east. He is going to stand by while Iran obtains nuclear weapons, which Iran fully intends to use against Israel. Ahadenijad has already mocked Obama, which makes it obvious that Iran will ignore Obamas begging.
no_slappz hathor, you wrote:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 15:08:28
I knew a Black physicist that was treated so badly that he decided to get a law degree. I went to engineering school with people white who became doctors, lawyers and MBAs. So what? As for the black physicist you claim to have known, perhaps he was a lousy student. I knew white students who were discouraged by professors who suggested their future was probably elsewhere. Some people call painful advice harrassment or mistreatment, when, in fact, the recipients are hearing what they need to hear. You wrote: I knew Black students that were good in math and science, but looked to alternative careers, one even became a minister. I knew white high-school students who were good in math and science, even going so far as to major in these fields in college. I can recall one who then became an actor who has had many roles on TV and in movies. You wrote: You look at raw test scores and dont see the individuals who have the education, test scores, but choose not to be the first or the person that has to overcome the perceptions of being not good enough. False. Anyway, with respect to this discussion, I am looking at the Big Picture. Bottom line blacks score much lower than whites and asians on standardized math and science tests. You wrote: There are a lot of Black people who are scientist, but are not celebrities, No, there are not a lot of black scientists. There are virtually none. Scientists have Phds in their fields. Meanwhile, scientists white, asian or black are rarely celebrities. You wrote: I have worked with them. The jobs they have are very mundane, doing repetitive analysis day after day. Among them are many white folk in the same bolt. You seem to be writing about lab technicians or other people who are part of a scientific team. But
35 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
not true scientists. You wrote: Most scientist are not superstars or make the salaries of most MBAs. There isnt a lot of incentive to become a scientist, when a business degree is valued more. Math people are getting IT degrees. The preceding is true. But, as always, you are dodging the issue of why so few blacks are advancing the state of knowledge in technical areas. You wrote: I think that you know this and like being the unique Negro, so you have to be contrary. If I were, as you say, the unique Negro, I would be truly unique. Why? Because I am not a Negro.
Hathor no_slappz,
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 16:14:16
This blog is not our fist encounter, so my impressions of you are not totally about how you present yourself here.
Thad on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 16:34:10 Wow. And here I was under the impression that it was the conservative American ideology that a man be judged by what he does and not by who his fathers were or where he was born. As for Obama being muslim because he praised Farrakhan at one time or another, hell, that must make Jerry Falwell, Pat Robertson and Billy Graham Jewish, then. After all, theyve all praised Israel endlessly. No, there are not a lot of black scientists. There are virtually none. Scientists have Phds in theirfields. Meanwhile, scientists white, asian or black are rarely celebrities. Bullshit.One of the men who discovered the structure of DNA was black. Won a Nobel Prize for it, too.
no_slappz hathor,
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 16:41:04
My impressions of you are based on, and confined to, the comments you post. The totality of your existence is irrelevant. Meanwhile, I present myself on other sites as I do here.
leigh204 ^ You mean, besides being annoying? lol!
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 16:49:12
36 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Hathor The totality of your existence is irrelevant. Then why respond to me?
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 16:57:15
Mayhue The totality of your existence is irrelevant. *********************************
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 18:40:12
Why say something so inherently evil and lacking in empathy. To utter something so demeaning and carelessly speaks to your own virulence and complete contempt for Black people. That is something social darwinists and eugenicists say. That is something that Whites have uttered in some convoluted form or another to Black people ad nauseam. It always comes down to diminishing the accomplishments and contributions of Black people as irrelevant and of course non existent. Hathor has the wisdom of experience and she has personally seen the breadth of many hotspots in Black culture. She is deserving of existence and is relevant as a human being. This statement plainly encompasses why White men, White people can never truly see Blacks as even compareably human.
leigh204 no_slappz= 0 (pwnd) mayhue = 1 Mayhue, you rock! Woot! Woot!
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 18:55:05
Herneith on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 19:24:43 Only someone with no knowledge of finance, economics, the last 40 years of US history, mixed with the capacity to believe Bushs response to 9/11 was wrong can call Obama levelheaded. Level-headed! A physiological impossibility! We would all look like Wile E. Coyote after having an acme anvil dropped on our heads! As Ive said, you really really need a course in economics. Go play Bingo or buy a lottery ticket! Help the economy out! But that does NOT mean it was profitable for every participant at all times. Is there anything 100% profitable? If so, be a pal and tell everyone. Moreover, people make financial mistakes all the time.
37 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Really? I never realized that, but in hindsight youre right, I should never have purchased those cheap shoes, they are already falling off my feet. Again your advice and insights are invaluable! In recent years people bought homes expecting them to appreciate almost immediately. Instead, over the last couple of years, prices have dropped. Thats capitalism for you! You take your chances. Is there any meaningful difference between the roles of realtors and mortgage brokers versus their counterparts in the slave trade? Yes, the realtors are selling houses, not human beings. I dont think you could have purchased slaves with a 20% down payment and a mortgage plan. Correct me if Im wrong. Eventually, we will pass the bottom and prices will begin to climb. For once I agree with you! Nows the time to buy property for investment purposes. Of course this depends on the market in the particular area. Toronto for example has a booming real estate market, it is a sellers paradise right now. However if it crashes, watch out! I believe the Chicago real estate market is dead, purchase there. Today, buyers and operators of businesses are in the same boat. Thats the same boat they were in during era of slavery. Yes the Titanic! How many industries that once formed the basis of major US fortunes are greatly diminished or no longer exist? Thats the nature of capitalism. Do you have something against capitalism? I enjoy the fruits of capitalism as it keeps me in shoes, purses, clothes, Belgium chocolate etc! another smart guy from Harvard or MIT will create the company that knocks Microsoft out of its place in the Dow. Any suggestions as to who this might be? Another point I agree with you on, a miracle! The forces of economics make this change inevitable This is with everything in life. Help a heifer out, provide some tips for investments. I can recall one who then became an actor who has had many roles on TV and in movies. Who, Mel Blanc? He did the voice overs for the Bug Bunny cartoons! Fabulous actor! I love Bugs Bunny, Tweety Bird and Pepe La Pew! Theyre my favourite actors, or should I say animal actors! I cry as I type this, it brings back such pleasant memories! Im going to pop a Bugs Bunny tape in a watch it now! No, there are not a lot of black scientists. What about James Watson? http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/revealed-scientistwho-sparked-racism-row-has-black-genes-764104.html
38 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
I am not a Negro. Are you a negress? If so, shame on you! hathor, My impressions of you are based on, and confined to, the comments you post. The totality of your existence is irrelevant. Meanwhile, I present myself on other sites as I do here. Are you computer generated? As for the other sites, you have been banned from most of them, Consider yourself lucky you are allowed to do so here! That puts me in mind of the song, Thanks for the Memories! My feelings of you are that of an automaton. You have little or no redeeming features based upon what you write. You are the definition of incongruous, as I doubt you would utter these views to a black persons face. That is if you know any black people in an intimate way. If you do, do you spout what is ultimately tripe to them? You are deserving of any ridicule meted out. Being such an automaton you shouldnt mind.
Jalylah on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 20:15:52 no_slappz, is a very good commentator on this blog. He contributes different and fresh opinions on a blog that mostly consist of anti white and ant-American commentators. I dont always agree with his opinion but I think its great that he doesnt have a group think mentality.
Herneith ^^^^^^^ Are you one of his two or three posters at his blog?
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 20:53:04
I dont always agree with his opinion but I think its great that he doesnt have a group think mentality. Group think? He espouses nothing but group think, white supremacist group think. You agree with most of it, hence your characterization of being anti-American, anti-white is one and the same as anti-American to you. No one agrees with every opinion, it is absurd to think this. He contributes different and fresh opinions on a blog that mostly consist of anti white and ant-American commentators. Different, yes, fresh, no. He only reiterate the same views in general as do other white supremacists site, same sh#t, different toilet bowl.
no_slappz herneith, you wrote:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 21:22:04
I dont think you could have purchased slaves with a 20% down payment and a mortgage plan. Correct me if Im wrong. Consider yourself corrected. Credit has always been part of every business, including the plantation business of the Old South.
39 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
no_slappz herneith, you asked: Is there anything 100% profitable? If so, be a pal and tell everyone.
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 21:27:39
Microsoft has been profitable every year since it became a public company. The utility industry has a hard-to-beat record for sustained profitability. But if you want a risk-free investment, then you have to put your money in Treasury Securities.
J To be fair to No_Slappz!! There is a lot more said on White Supremacist sites such as issues of extermination, repatriation etc
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 21:30:19
Dochartaigh on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 21:30:45 I posted this question on a different thread and got no response, Im not trying to derail as abagond says, but I dont know where else to ask this question. This is to all black christian. As a black person and christian, how do you feel about verses like Leviticus 25: 45-46 45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession. 46And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen FOR EVER: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour. So basically it is okay to enslave people that are not Jews. Or when Jesus says in Luke 12:46-47 46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware, and will cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers. 47 And that servant, which knew his lords will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be BEATEN with many stripes. This is an honest question, and one of the reasons I stopped believing in Christianity, how do you reconcile these verses and many many others that condone slavery?
Herneith on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 21:41:48 Microsoft has been profitable every year since it became a public company. A given. What about Apple and other companies such as Google and Yahoo?
40 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
But if you want a risk-free investment, then you have to put your money in Treasury Securities. How good are the returns on average? There is a lot more said on White Supremacist sites such as issues of extermination, repatriation etc Yes J, I give you that. He prefers to give a laundry list of what ails blacks. If only we were all athletes or entertainers! Why he cares, I dont know as he offers no solutions.
no_slappz herneith, you wrote: My feelings of you are that of an automaton.
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 21:56:08
Based on your statement above, you have defined yourself as an automaton. I agree. You do respond predictably. You wrote: You have little or no redeeming features based upon what you write. Based on your writing efforts here, you have always struggled with composition. You wrote: You are the definition of incongruous, as I doubt you would utter these views to a black persons face. Why would I not utter my views to a black persons face? You wrote: That is if you know any black people in an intimate way. If you do, do you spout what is ultimately tripe to them? Intimate? No. Casually? Yes. You wrote: You are deserving of any ridicule meted out. Being such an automaton you shouldnt mind. The amusing part of your rant comes from what you do not understand. It is easy to have face-to-face debates with people if at least one person me knows enough to control the situation. You are correct that it does not bother me when people like you try to dominate a debate by lobbing insults. In your case, as it is in almost every case, ridicule and sarcasm expose your total lack of knowledge. In a room full of people who are equally ignorant, you might get a laugh or two, but, in fact, it rarely works that way for long. Especially for someone with your limited grasp of humor techniques.
41 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Most often, people in the vicinity take a serious interest in what is said the content and relate to the moment in a way that reflects the intellectual soundness and civility of the discourse even if they dislike what they hear.
Herneith ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Hahahahahaha!!!!!!!
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 22:05:40
no_slappz herneith, you asked:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 22:06:13
What about Apple and other companies such as Google and Yahoo? Google has been insanely profitable and will remain that way for several more years. But that does NOT mean its stock will rise. Apple has been extremely profitable the last few years due to the iPod and the iPhone. Its computer business is a small contributor to profits. Its new products may keep the company in a highly profitable state for a few more years. But Steve Jobs underwent a liver transplant last year. Thus, his days are numbered. Is there anyone in line to replace him and his creative thinking? Not likely. Regarding Treasury Securities, you asked: How good are the returns on average? A Treasury Security pays exactly what it says it pays. A 5-year Treasury bond paying 4% pays 4% a year for 5 years. No mystery. Guaranteed.
Herneith ^^^^^^^^^^ Thanks!
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 22:09:43
no_slappz Dochartaigh,
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 22:15:26
Religion is one of the few great hoxes humans have perpetrated upon themselves. The Bible Old Testament and New is fiction. Maybe some of the writing is enjoyable. But most of it is nutty. My advice: take the good parts and treat them as a philosophy of life. Meanwhile, ignore the nutty parts, which means ignoring the parts you mentioned as well as the parts that claim there is a god who had a son who walked the Earth.
42 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
If necessary, repeat this exercise for Islam. The Koran is another book of fiction.
Dochartaigh on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 22:45:17 Well I agree, but the majority of black folks in America are Christian and I was wondering how they reconcile Yahwehs love of slavery. And how there only way to salvation is through a Jew/white savior.
Eurasian Sensation @ no_slappz:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 23:08:13
Obama IS a former muslim. He was born to a muslim father. According to Islamic tradition, that means he was born a muslim. He lived in Indonesia a muslim nation, by law during his formative years, and while there he attended a muslim school. Since the state religion of Indonesia is Islam, that means he was going to school in an Islamic environment. No one at ages 8 to 12 escapes the psychological effects of complete immersion in his society. Kids are impressionable. They absorb lunacy without question, as all religions demand. Ok, as an INDONESIAN and the NON-MUSLIM son of a MUSLIM, let me clear this up for you. I think Im qualified to tell you what happens in Indonesia since you clearly dont know jack about it. Indonesia is not a Muslim nation by law. It is a nation which has a Muslim majority. Islam is NOT enshrined as the state religion; in fact, the constitution officially recognises 5 different religions, since Indonesia has always been a multi-ethnic and multi-faith society. Obamas school was not a Muslim school. My (Christian) cousin went there. The Indonesian school system is predominantly secular. Even if did go to a Muslim school, so what? Plenty of non-Catholics go to Catholic schools for various reasons. Islamic fundamentalism does exist in Indonesia, but it is very much confined to the margins. The average Indonesian is far less defined by his or her religious identity than in most other Muslimmajority countries. Indonesia is one of the most secular and tolerant Muslim societies in the world. There is no law against changing religion; half of my family are Muslims who have converted to Christianity. Obamas Indonesian stepfather from all accounts was a Muslim who barely practiced, which is very common in Java. Most Muslims (apart from the most hardcore) would not begrudge Obamas conversion to Christianity, particularly because it is well-known that he was never given much instruction in Islamic teachings; neither his father or stepfather were serous about the religion. I cant believe I just wasted the last 5 minutes typing that for your benefit, no_slappz, because I know you wont take heed of anything that doesnt fit your agenda. But hopefully the other readers here will read this and be better informed to counter the misinformation that gets spread by the likes of you.
43 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
leigh204 @Eurasian Sensation:
on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 23:21:08
I cant believe I just wasted the last 5 minutes typing that for your benefit, no_slappz, because I know you wont take heed of anything that doesnt fit your agenda. But hopefully the other readers here will read this and be better informed to counter the misinformation that gets spread by the likes of you. I thank you. I always appreciate your informative posts!
Herneith on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 23:48:24 But hopefully the other readers here will read this and be better informed to counter the misinformation that gets spread by the likes of you. What, slappz is wrong?! Hahahaha!!!! Prepare for another diatribe, just time it will be about Muslims!
Thad on Sun 28 Feb 2010 at 23:59:42 Indonesia is not a Muslim nation by law. It is a nation which has a Muslim majority. Islam is NOT enshrined as the state religion; in fact, the constitution officially recognises 5 different religions, since Indonesia has always been a multi-ethnic and multi-faith society. Wait a minute: you mean No_Slappz misinterpreted another countrys history in support of his loony arguments? No way! Say it isnt so!
leigh204 Again. no_slappz= 0 (pwnd x 2) mayhue = 1 Eurasian Sensation = 1
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 00:10:48
Dochartaigh on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 00:18:47 So any other opinions on my question about biblical slavery? I know that some minorities in America refuse Christianity because they feel it is another way for white people to suppress minorities.
Herneith @Leigh:
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 00:23:58
CANADA WON THE GOLD MEDAL IN MENS HOCKEY AGAINST THE STATES!!!!! Canada=3 U.S.=2
44 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
In overtime! On a more serious note, I dont even watch hockey, LOL!
Eurasian Sensation @ Dochartaigh
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 00:36:12
This is an honest question, and one of the reasons I stopped believing in Christianity, how do you reconcile these verses and many many others that condone slavery? In Luke 12:46-47, is Jesus talking about servants or slaves? I dont know the context, but thats a big distinction. I guess its about which bits of the Bible you want to take seriously. Its a big book, with lots of great stuff, and lots of stuff that is frankly ridiculous. I consider myself a Christian in only the loosest sense of the world. Anyone who claims you have to live your life according to absolutely everything in the Bible is deluded. I mean, if you follow it to the letter you are not even allowed to eat shrimps, and have to kill people who dare to work on the Sabbath. If the Bible is indeed the word of God, it is most certainly the word as filtered through the perspectives of the Hebrew people of the day. So you are going to get some stuff that no longer makes sense given what we now know. Likewise with Islam, it is filtered through the mindset of 6th century Arabia. So my advice would be not to regard the Bible or any other religious text as the undisputed truth, but look for the basic underlying spirit of it.
Eurasian Sensation on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 00:41:16 @ Thad: Wait a minute: you mean No_Slappz misinterpreted another countrys history in support of his loony arguments? No way! Say it isnt so! I know, it was a shock, since hes never done that before @ leigh204: Glad youre keeping score. I didnt realise blog-commenting was a sport!
45 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Dochartaigh To Eurasian Sensation
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 00:56:51
Regardless if Jesus is talking about a servant or slave he is condoning, controlling and beating another human being for disobediants. Also in Matt 5:18 For assuredly, I say to you, till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle will by no means pass from the law till all is fulfilled. Here he is refering to the Old Testement laws that most certainly condone slavery among other strange things, and all being fulfilled meaning his return.
leigh204 @Herneith: @Leigh:
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 01:12:32
CANADA WON THE GOLD MEDAL IN MENS HOCKEY AGAINST THE STATES!!!!! Canada=3 U.S.=2 In overtime! On a more serious note, I dont even watch hockey, LOL! I dont watch hockey either. lol! I was so happy when we wonon home turf! Woohoo! Im getting ready to watch the closing ceremonies now.
leigh204 @Eurasian Sensation: @ leigh204:
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 01:15:09
Glad youre keeping score. I didnt realise blog-commenting was a sport! It is when it concerns no_slappz, no_scabbz, what have you.
no_slappz eurasian sensation,
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 02:52:59
It might do you a little good to review the early years of the Suharto regime and the fact that the government itself was a muslim stronghold. True, Indonesia is not a muslim theocracy. But, as you wrote: the constitution officially recognises 5 different religions, since Indonesia has always been a multiethnic and multi-faith society. In other words, five religions are officially approved by the state. In the US, there are NO religions
46 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
with state approval. Therefore, with a population that is 88% muslim during the years of Obamas residence it was a de facto muslim theocracy. You clearly do not understand the meaning of the First Amendment of the US Constitution. Nor does anyone else in Indonesia. Moreover, recent increases in violence between muslims and Christians in Indonesia shows that trouble has always been brewing.
Thad Eurasian Sensation asks: In Luke 12:46-47, is Jesus talking about servants or slaves?
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 03:03:10
There wasnt much of a difference under Roman law. Slaves were foreign born servants. Servants were locally born slaves.
Thad on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 03:12:05 In other words, five religions are officially approved by the state. In the US, there are NO religions with state approval. Therefore, with a population that is 88% muslim during the years of Obamas residence it was a de facto muslim theocracy. [Speaking gently to the obviously overwrought No_Slappz] Son, youre really reaching. You obviously dont have a clue as to what recognized means in this context, nor do you understand sweet f%*k all about Suharto, whos extremely bloody reign had nothing at all to do with theocracy and everything to do with your precious CIA, who put and kept him in power. Indonesia recognizes five religions and is a secular state. This does not mean Indonesia is a theocracy. The United States does indeed recognize religions far more than five. Try to declare yourself a Jedi Knight priest on your next tax return and see what happens to you. All states have lists of religions which they consider to be legitimate and others which they dont, including your precious Yew Ess uv Ay. This does not make them theocracies. Nor does a country having 88% of any one religion make it a theocracy. Both Brazil and the U.S. are around 80% Christian and we are not theocracies. No_Slappz, if youre going to hate on Obama, hate away. But if you really want to convince people and not look like a complete conspiracy-minded putz. Oh, hell, what am I saying? Yknow, I think youre right, No_Slappz. I think you need to tell the whole world about how Obama is a Manchurian Candidate for the eeeeevil Muslims. People will really get into this stuff, Im sure, and it will make you and your fellow travellers look very intelligent and well-informed in the eyes of the world and the American electorate. I also think you need to inform people about how Obama is really the leader of the Bavarian Illuminati. This sort of conspiratorial logic really makes people like you look good and convinces the masses.
47 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Go for it, son! Before the mind control sattelites get you!
Herneith on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 03:26:42 You obviously dont have a clue as to what recognized means in this context, nor do you understand sweet f%*k all about Suharto, whos extremely bloody reign had nothing at all to do with theocracy and everything to do with your precious CIA, who put and kept him in power. It was the times! I think it was Obamas fault that the U.S. lost to Canada in Olympic hockey. I think it was Thulsa Doom from Conan the Barbarian by Robert E Howard! Go for it, son! Before the mind control sattelites get you! You forgot to tell him to stay away from tin foil as it acts as a conductor for mind control!
Eurasian Sensation @ no_slappz,
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 04:11:12
I know you may have quickly looked up some stuff about Indonesia on Wikipedia, but the Suharto regime was the subject of my thesis. And Im Indonesian. So the idea of you lecturing me about Indonesian religion and politics is a funny one, but no funnier than you lecturing all the black people here about how backward they are. it was a de facto muslim theocracy As Thad said, no more than the US, UK or Australia are de facto Christian theocracies. There is no functional sharia court in Indonesia, no ayatollah in charge of determining policy. Indonesia under Suharto was an authoritarian regime run by people who just happened to be Muslim. Indeed, fundamentalist Islam was actively suppressed in that time, as were many other movements and ideologies. The main form of indoctrination in Indonesia is nationalist, rather than religious.
leigh204 @Eurasian Sensation: @ no_slappz,
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 04:34:24
I know you may have quickly looked up some stuff about Indonesia on Wikipedia, but the Suharto regime was the subject of my thesis. And Im Indonesian. So the idea of you lecturing me about Indonesian religion and politics is a funny one, but no funnier than you lecturing all the black people here about how backward they are. Thats right! You tell him, Eurasian!
48 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Eurasian Sensation @ Herneith I think it was Thulsa Doom from Conan the Barbarian LOLs.
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 04:38:37
Wow, who knew that Conan the Barbarian was actually a prophetic vision of the future, with Thulsa representing Obama, the evil black sorceror-king? In which case, who does Conan represent? Glenn Beck?
Herneith on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 04:57:19 No, the character grunts rather than speaks in a coherent manner, much more introspective than Glenn Beck! At least Conan is more manly!
B. R. on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 12:26:49 What do you expect from a guy like no slapz who thinks the USA never toppled democratic governments? He obviously doesnt know anything about USA policies in South America where the cia was involved with various toppling of democratic governments in the cold war. Brazil and Chile for starters. You know, I get fed up with these kind of people bashing Obama. How quickly they forget that the Bush administration tanked the USA like no one has in a long time. They are the ones responsible for leaving our children with less than our parents gave us.And leaving our children with a hate and disgust of America that will take decades to repair. You know, I really dont care if Obama is muslim, I like him, I like the direction he is trying to take the country.He was handed one of the worst scenarios that a president could be handed and guess what? The USA hasnt tanked under him. I hate the republicans and tea baggers, they are just closet racists .They leave a bad taste
nicia For O Dochartaigh,
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 13:39:58
According to Bible standards, Kidnapping was punishable by death. So the Slave traders were blood guilty. Among Israelites, slavery only occured when the person got into debt or committed a crime. Even then, they were to be released in 7 years or what was known as the Jubilee year.(every 7 years) So the Bible has instances of slavery,it by no means condones it, especially as Africans were kidnapped illegally. Otherwise, God would not have sent Moses to free the Israelites who themselves were slaves under the Egyptians.
49 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
no_slappz eurasian sensation,
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 15:32:47
Your response shows your total lack of comprehension of the meaning of the First Amendment of the US Consititution. As I said, the US Consitution recognizes NO religion. NONE. Not one. But Indonesias constitution recognizes FIVE. By the way, I noticed Judaism is not among them. By acknowledging a state preference for those five with 88% of the population following Islam you have defined a muslim state. Meanwhile, the fact that you wrote a paper on the Suharto regime means about as much to me as papers written by people who claim 9/11 was a conspiracy orchestrated by Bush and Cheney. You might have written a brilliant scholarly paper or total nonsense. Who knows? However, if you want, you can e-mail me your paper at no_slappz@yahoo.com and I will read it.
B. R. on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 15:41:13 Also, these tea baggers complaints about socialism and they think Obama is leading us there. They really dont know what living under socialism, like a Hugo Chaves wants, is like at all. I would rather have capatalism than any other ideology out there now. Not hyper rabid capatalism , that just tanked the USA, but capitalism with a concience that has social programs.
no_slappz thad, you wrote:
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 15:43:34
The United States does indeed recognize religions far more than five. Wrong. The US Constitution recognizes NONE. NOT ONE. ZERO. You wrote: Try to declare yourself a Jedi Knight priest on your next tax return and see what happens to you. Again, you show your ignorance. You can declare yourself a Jedi Knight priest if you want. The IRS only snoops into your tax status if you appear to have under-paid what you owe. If you think people who work for religious insitutions are free of tax obligations, you are wildly mistaken. You wrote: All states have lists of religions which they consider to be legitimate and others which they dont, including your precious Yew Ess uv Ay. If by states you mean countries, then yes, many states do acknowledge specific religions. But the US does not.
50 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Thats why anyone in the US who wants to form a faith-based organization is free to do so. Thats why in the US Scientology is legally equal to Christianity.
no_slappz b.r., you wrote:
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 15:53:45
What do you expect from a guy like no slapz who thinks the USA never toppled democratic governments? Toppling democratic governments? Depends on your definition of democratic government. You wrote: He obviously doesnt know anything about USA policies in South America where the cia was involved with various toppling of democratic governments in the cold war. Brazil and Chile for starters. Brazil? You have no idea what youre stating. Democracy is a relatively new idea in Brazil. Chile? Hmmm. You seem oblivious to the fact that the nations of South America have been ruled mostly by military strongmen who like to claim they believe in democracy, but actually maintain their power through the control of the military. Everything is murky in South America. Meanwhile, the one goal the US has when it meddles is the goal of improving the economy of the country in which it is meddling. Democracy and capitalism produce prosperity and peace, which benefits not only the country itself, but the world in general.
Jamaicafest on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 18:14:35 @no_ slappz said Chile? Hmmm. You seem oblivious to the fact that the nations of South America have been ruled mostly by military strongmen who like to claim they believe in democracy, but actually maintain their power through the control of the military. Everything is murky in South America. In Chile democratically elected leader Salvador Allende was deposed and murdered in a CIA inspired coup and dictator Augusto Pinochet put in his place.
Dochartaigh on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 19:41:58 To Nicia Among Israelites, slavery only occured when the person got into debt or committed a crime. Even then, they were to be released in 7 years or what was known as the Jubilee year. That is a nice thought but that is not what it says in Leviticus. Notice it says you will inherit them for a possession Forever! Not seven years. Leviticus 25: 45-46 45 Moreover of the children of the strangers that do sojourn among you, of them shall ye buy, and of their families that are with you, which they begat in your land: and they shall be your possession.
51 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen FOREVER: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour. So basically it is okay to buy slaves that are not Jews. According to Bible standards, Kidnapping was punishable by death. So the Slave traders were blood guilty. Regardless if kidnapping is punishable by death, buying a slave for life, and beating him or her was not.
Thad on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 22:17:00 Dochartaigh, I too am wondering how some of our fellow commentators who are normally so absolutist in their moral beliefs (witness Abagonds recent posts about It was the times! or My family never owned slaves! for instance) can harmonize said beliefs with their expressed Christian faith. The Bible is chock-o-block full of appologies for slavery so what do we say to THAT? It was the times? Abagond? Anybody?
Dochartaigh on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 22:25:51 I would particularly like to hear from abagond seeing how he was a Marxist Atheist turned Catholic. He said he read the bible and it changed his mind, I would love to hear the verses that changed his mind and why they did so.
52 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
J With regard to:
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 22:30:09
I too am wondering how some of our fellow commentators who are normally soabsolutist in their moral beliefs (witness Abagonds recent posts about It was the times! or My family never owned slaves! for instance) can harmonize said beliefs with their expressed Christian faith. The Bible is chock-o-block full of appologies for slavery so what do we say to THAT? It was the times? Abagond? Anybody? Can I be that anybody please?? Why thank you!!! It was the times the very sad times he he he he
Dochartaigh To Thad
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 22:30:45
I read your Whitening Theory On Brazil and I was just wondering why you feel there is more interracial coupling in Brazil?
Herneith on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 22:46:54 The Bible is chock-o-block full of appologies for slavery so what do we say to THAT? Ill go with it was the times!
Dochartaigh To Herneith So does that mean it was okay?
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 23:00:56
ColorofLuv O Dochartaigh
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 23:10:25
I know you directed your comment to Thad, but Ill add my two cents. Based on my personal experiences it is simply a more diverse country. Due to its segregated history, one drop rules, Jim Crow laws and over simplification of racial prejudice, the U.S. for the longest time listed you as Black or White. In Brazil this was not the case. It is not necessarily a Black or White issue. (People are not hung up on it) just my opinion.
Thad
53 of 79
on Mon 1 Mar 2010 at 23:13:34
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
I read your Whitening Theory On Brazil and I was just wondering why you feel there is more interracial coupling in Brazil? The most probable explanation is a more even population mix to begin with. If you have a population thats 10% black and mixed and, say, 70% white and you presume that one in ten people marries oute side of their color, you get 1% mixed couples. If you have a population thats 50% mixed and black and 50% white, and the same ratio of intermixing, you get 5% mixed couples. So thats a big factor right there.
no_slappz Dochartaigh, I think it was you who referred to the Bible as the word of God.
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 01:22:00
Anyone who believes anything as silly preposterous as that cannot engage in a rational discussion. The Bible Old Testament and New is a book of fiction, that sadly, billions of people think too much of.
nicia on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 01:50:41 The Bible in Exodus 21:16 clearly states that anyone kidnapping a man and sells him or still has him with him when caught must be put to death. Theres no record of Israelites specifically going after a certain race of people for the sole purpose of making them into slaves. (unlike the slave traders who fit the bill PERFECTLY) The Bible also condemns slavery based on RACE alone. Otherwise God would not have brought the plagues on the Egyptians and would have left the Israelites in slavery. The Bible also notes that if a slave lost and eye or a tooth, they were to be set free through beating from a master. As well, its true that foreigners were slaves but throughout the Bible, the Israelites had been threatened or attacked by them. Imagine you attack an innocent group of people and they conquer you. It would be too dangerous to let you run loose in their camp,especially as you attacked them first People as well also sold themselves into slavery to pay off debt, crime etc and it was the Israelites who were set free every 7 years The slavery under Isralites was more like being a servant. It was not like the brutal slave trade where a slave lasted on average 7 years before dying.
no_slappz nicia,
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 01:58:59
54 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
It seems you think the Bible is fact rather than fiction. Wake up.
Herneith To Herneith So does that mean it was okay?
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 02:02:21
First of all, I was being facetious. Joking aside, this is a common refrain when so-called religious people are asked about such contradictions contained in the Bible. The ones who have a clue, dont take the Bible as literal in its entirety. There are myriad ways of reading and interpreting the Bible, hence all these Christian denominations. If you look at the history of slavery and Christianity, you will notice the changing views, abolitionism is an example of this. Of course the pro-slavery elements are going to use biblical passages to justify slavery, but so did the abolitionist to argue the contrary. It all boils down to belief. Christianity, as with other things such as laws etc, changed, changes, with the times. If you wish to talk about atheists in history and atrocities, how about Stalin and Mao? You can use many things to justify or argue against an abominable act. Ultimately, religiosity or lack thereof is but one of many. Nitpicking over passages in the Bible is one such means of argument. Depending on the person, they will agree or disagree.
Dochartaigh To Nicia
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 02:56:15
Thank you for stating the contradictions in the bible, and apologizing for any form of slavery. It was the times right? The Bible also condemns slavery based on RACE alone. Otherwise God would not have brought the plagues on the Egyptians and would have left the Israelites in slavery. No the bible only condemns slavery for Jews as Leviticus states. 46 And ye shall take them as an inheritance for your children after you, to inherit them for a possession; they shall be your bondmen FOREVER: but over your brethren the children of Israel, ye shall not rule one over another with rigour. Not only was Yahweh condoning slavery he was also Racist about who he wanted enslaved. But I have a funny feeling it wasnt a God who made up these laws, it was probably a Jewish person.
Eurasian Sensation @ no_slappz: Saudi Arabia, Pakistan, Iran these are Islamic states. Indonesia is a state in which most people are Muslims.
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 02:56:31
Theres a massive difference. Until you have lived in Indonesia and actually talked TO people there (rather than AT them), dont give me this bull about it being an Islamic state. Its just a joke. Your comment about Indonesia not recognising Judaism is true, but has nothing to do with anything, frankly.
55 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Aside from that, I give up. Theres no point. Please realise that when people give up on arguing with you, it is nothing to do with your arguments being so intelligent that you win. Its that there is no point arguing with someone whose mind is so slanted in a certain way that he refuses to see anything that doesnt fit his world view.
Natasha W on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:02:02 Eurasian Sensation, I was wondering when you would realize it was futile, lol.
Dochartaigh To Herneith
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:03:05
If you wish to talk about atheists in history and atrocities, how about Stalin and Mao? A lack of a belief does not make a person do anything, only a belief can do that. Therefore Stalin and Mao were acting on the beliefs of communism or fascism or whatever crazy ideas they had about controlling people. The Buddha was an atheist as well, but it was not atheism that was the cause of his ideas. Only belief can make a person do good or bad things not the lack of.
Herneith @Eurasian Sensation:
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:03:19
How long did it take you to figure that out? You are wrong before you even start. Its like f$rting in a wind tunnel!
leigh204 ^ Yes, the noxious fumes blow back in your face. Theres no point in pointing out to the pointless.
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:12:23
Eurasian Sensation @ Natasha, leigh and Herneith:
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:24:24
I figured it out a while back, but I have a low tolerance for ignorance. I work as a community educator and cant help but try and educate the ass of that ass. Maybe I have a saviour complex. But since lots of other people read this blog, it is kind of important to correct lies and codswallop. Dont want the impressionable to think that hes right.
Herneith on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:26:52 A lack of a belief does not make a person do anything, only a belief can do that. Yes, you are right to a certain extent. I believe if I play with nitroglycerin, I could blow my hands off. Do I play with it? No, so in that respect belief in nitroglycerins negative effect prevents me from doing so. I believe that I will win the lottery every time I buy tickets, have I won? No, but I keep purchasing them in the belief that I may. I dont believe in going to work but I do. Otherwise I would
56 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
be eating out of dumpsters, at a mission or sleeping under a bridge, or over a street vent. I go to work out of necessity, not belief. When I say belief or lack thereof, I am not referring to religion only, but other aspects of life. People believe in many things from the mundane to the profound. They may choose to act on something or not, whether belief is there or not.
Herneith on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:40:25 @ Natasha, leigh and Herneith: I figured it out a while back, but I have a low tolerance for ignorance. I work as a community educator and cant help but try and educate the ass of that ass. Maybe I have a saviour complex. But since lots of other people read this blog, it is kind of important to correct lies and codswallop. Dont want the impressionable to think that hes right. Yes, Eurasian Sensation, you are what is referred to as a decent person. You are absolutely right in regards to answering his ignorance. I have a low tolerance for his obtuseness so choose to reply with tomfoolery. You are right that others read this blog and may think he is right when people choose to not respond to him. He is exasperating though! Are you going to email him your thesis? He left his email address for you! On second thoughts dont! Email him and curse him out! Thats what Id do, but hed probably want to debate the usage of me, the Queen of cursers, curse words, LOL!!!!!
Thad Nicia sez: The Bible also condemns slavery based on RACE alone.
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 03:57:44
Oh, OK then. So were just getting upset at slavery based on RACE here. Slavery based on other things is perfectly acceptable, is it?
Natasha W on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 04:00:45 Eurasian Sensation, I understand. I think like that too. But I try to limit it to a few go-rounds, otherwise Id be here all day, debating with trolls.
abagond on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 14:50:29 I started to comment but then wound up writing a post about the whole Bible and slavery thing: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2010/03/01/does-the-bible-say-that-slavery-is-wrong/
no_slappz eurasian sensation, you wrote:
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 17:48:50
Your comment about Indonesia not recognising Judaism is true, but has nothing to do with anything, frankly. Of course it has a lot to do with the whole business of mixing religion and government. But, as someone from a nation that does exactly that, you cannot grasp one of the most fundamental and
57 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
defining characteristics of the US: The Separation of Church and State. Indonesia, by recognizing five religions in its constitution, makes a clear statement that the Church and the State are NOT separated. That is not mean Indonesia is a theocratic state like Saudi Arabia. But it does mean the status of religion, specifically Islam, is elevated and has a legal standing that gives it power. And, as recent events in every muslim country are showing, trouble is brewing.
no_slappz eurasian sensation, I remain willing to read your thesis. Send it to no_slappz@yahoo.com.
on Tue 2 Mar 2010 at 17:50:18
Eurasian Sensation on Wed 3 Mar 2010 at 10:19:30 @ no_slappz: the thesis is over 10 years old, Ive no idea where it is. So Im afraid I cant help you there. I got a B+. But as I said, Im done. No point talking calmly into a hurricane.
Thad on Wed 3 Mar 2010 at 12:13:30 I think you need to read a few basic works of Indonesian history before trying to tackle EAs thesis, NS. Crawl before you walk and all that.
no_slappz thad,
on Wed 3 Mar 2010 at 19:33:47
Indonesia was ruled by Suharto, a rather brutal despot, during the years Obama lived there. At the time 1967-1971 Islam was a dominant force that Suharto sought to control. Meanwhile, as I stated originally, Obama was born to a muslim father. By that fact alone, Obama was a muslim at birth. He lived in a muslim country from the age of 6 to 10, highly impressionable years for kids. Like all kids, he absorbed the world around him. Hence Islam had a profound effect on him. After Obama became a practicing Christian, he joined the church headed by Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Wright is a muslim in Christian clothing, as his support for Louis Farrakhan of the Nation of Islam shows. Thus, Obama has stayed close to his muslim roots. Now Obama is suggesting he will push for the US to reduce its stockpile of nuclear weapons just
58 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
when Iran is building its first atomic bombs. Odd timing.
Thad [Applauds NS succesful mastery of Wikipedia]
on Wed 3 Mar 2010 at 19:38:20
Dochartaigh To No Slappz
on Wed 3 Mar 2010 at 20:52:57
What is your point? Who cares if Obama is a Muslim or not. Your logic is severely flawed, if he was born to a Muslim father that does not make him Muslim, there is not some genetic trait that makes a person a Muslim. I was born to a Christian family and now Im an Atheist, but with your logic I would still be a Christian. There are no Muslim children, Jewish children or Christian children. There are only children, all human beings are born Atheists. The brainwashing comes later. Oh and I voted 3rd party so dont think Im sticking up for Obama, Im not, Im just calling out your poor logic.
no_slappz Dochartaigh, you wrote: What is your point? Who cares if Obama is a Muslim or not.
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 01:07:17
Who cares? A majority of Americans would care very much IF Obama were STILL a muslim. A small number care that he is a former muslim. You wrote: Your logic is severely flawed, if he was born to a Muslim father that does not make him Muslim Wrong. According to the traditions and practices of Islam, the child of a muslim father is, at birth, a muslim. If you thought about this for a moment you would see that its obviously the case. You wrote: there is not some genetic trait that makes a person a Muslim. True. But no one suggested that. You wrote: I was born to a Christian family and now Im an Atheist, but with your logic I would still be a Christian. Undoubtedly you were baptized as a Christian, which means you and your parents participated in a Christian ritual that brings a new-born into the fold. Obviously the day arrives when you can renounce your role as a Christian.
59 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
You wrote: There are no Muslim children, Jewish children or Christian children. Theres plenty of evidence of Jewish genes. You wrote: There are only children, all human beings are born Atheists. The brainwashing comes later. For the most part, you have confused religious inter-generational practices with religious indoctrination. Ones religious status at birth is very much like ones citizenship at birth. It is the custom, if not the law, of the land for children to be citizens of the nation of which their parents are citizens. Oh and I voted 3rd party so dont think Im sticking up for Obama, Im not, Im just calling out your poor logic.
Dochartaigh To no slappz
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 01:26:53
Obviously the day arrives when you can renounce your role as a Christian. That can be said about any Religion including Islam. Obama said he is not a Muslim, so he is not a Muslim.
Thaddeus Blanchette on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 02:33:35 Wrong. According to the traditions and practices of Islam, the child of a muslim father is, at birth, a muslim. If you thought about this for a moment you would see that its obviously the case. Youre nuts and youre making a sophmoric argument baased on stupid sophisms. Whatever Islamic law might say about Obama, Obama BY AMERICAN LAW is not Islamic unless HE SAYS SO. Identity isnt simply what other folks say about you: its what you ahve to say about yourself. Save your Obama is muslim conspiracy theories for Bubba down at the tap, NS. Youre dealing with thinking adults here.
no_slappz Thaddeus Blanchette, you wrote:
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 03:41:22
Youre nuts and youre making a sophmoric argument baased on stupid sophisms. Apparently you are truly baffled by religious practices regarding that status of new-borns. You wrote:
60 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Whatever Islamic law might say about Obama, Obama BY AMERICAN LAW is not Islamic unless HE SAYS SO. AMERICAN LAW is silent on the subject of ones religion. Meanwhile, children have limited rights when it comes to declaring their acceptance or rejection of religion. Parents are empowered to force and coerce them into following any faith.
Eurasian Sensation on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 04:13:10 Im confused is Obama a Muslim, or the Antichrist, or a Communist, or a Fascist? Is it possible to be all of those things at once? Or maybe he is what all the actual evidence shows him to be, a Christian (since he goes to church every week) and a political moderate (he is far left only from a far right perspective).
Dochartaigh No slappz
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 04:20:11
America has freedom of religion, he could worship the flying spaghetti monster for all I care. Bush was a fundamentalist Christian, and look what happened to this country with 8 years of Christianity.
Uncle Milton To no_slappz: Theres plenty of evidence of Jewish genes.
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 04:44:32
True, but you can be born Black, Asian, or a Gentile Caucasian of any religion, be adopted by Jewish parents raised a Jew and be considered a Jew. Children of Jewish fathers but not raised in the Jewish religion (such as myself..) are generally not considered Jewish. It would appear that Obama Sr. walked away from Islam even before he got to the US. From everything I have read about Obama and his family, if you absolutely want to pin a creed on him that came from his family it would be some variant of Socialism. As for hm being Muslim.. so far no whippings or beheadings in the Rose garden which might actually liven things up in the political sphere.
Herneith on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 05:05:10 Youre nuts and youre making a sophmoric argument baased on stupid sophisms. Whatever Islamic law might say about Obama, Obama BY AMERICAN LAW is not Islamic unless HE SAYS SO. There are also loons who say Obama was actually born in Kenya! Thats right he was flown post haste minutes after his birth to Hawaii! I say hes from Uranus! Discuss! Im confused is Obama a Muslim, or the Antichrist, or a Communist, or a Fascist? Is it possible to
61 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
be all of those things at once? Hes whatever slappz can throw at him!
abagond Guy White copied parts of this post and wrote about it: http://guywhite.wordpress.com/2010/03/03/how-whites-got-rich/ He did not copy the parts that oppose his own argument. Money quote:
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 08:35:12
Look at Hiroshima and Nagasaki. These Oriental-majority cities are populated by high IQ people and recovered from nuclear attacks. But Detroit never recovered from getting blacks. Think about it. A city is better of getting bombed with nuclear bombs than getting blacks. Scary, racist thought, but is it factually false?
abagond on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 08:37:39 Just a word of warning: once No Slappz makes up his mind about something there is no reasoning with him. You will not be able to persuade him that that he is wrong about Obama being Muslim. You are wasting your words and letting him derail the thread.
abagond on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 14:07:26 I posted a comment on Guy Whites blog. It has not come out of moderation, even though others have, like this one: Has abagond ever written anything that wasnt 100% ass-backward incorrect? I pity the man. Take that argument one step backward. How did whites get land and slaves? Oh yeah, they wererich and technologically advanced. Guy White does not print the parts of my argument that opposes his, he does not let me comment on his blog and so then his commenters think I am some kind of brainless wonder. Wow. I am so glad now that I did not censor No Slappz.
ColorofLuv on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 14:35:03 Abagond rise above and let those that make their beds lie in them.
abagond You are right. Thanks.
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 14:44:24
no_slappz eurasian sensation, you wrote:
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 15:12:35
62 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Or maybe he is what all the actual evidence shows him to be, a Christian (since he goes to church every week) and a political moderate (he is far left only from a far right perspective). As usual, youve gotten it wrong. Since moving to the White House, Obama has NOT been a regular church-goer. Nominally he is a Christian. Not that it matters. But in his political heart, he is a Marxist, which is screamingly clear from his plans to redistribute this nations wealth.
Eurasian Sensation on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 15:23:45 @ abagond: I also posted a comment at Guy White which strangely is still awaiting moderation. I probably should have included more points about how white people totally kick ass. @ no_slappz: didnt know Obama could be both a Muslim AND a Marxist. As usual, you are a genius.
ColorofLuv No_slappz
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 15:25:36
I agree that Obama leans more towards Marxist ideals, but short of turning this blog into a political forum, what more would you ask of this country? Do you really think things would be different if McCain were in office? Historically, he voted more liberally than Obama. As for my honest political views: Were all victims of the Matrix. (If you havent seen the trilogy, watch it. It speaks volumes philosophically.)
no_slappz uncle milton, you wrote:
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 15:33:33
True, but you can be born Black, Asian, or a Gentile Caucasian of any religion, be adopted by Jewish parents raised a Jew and be considered a Jew. You are now officially mincing words. In fact, anyone can convert to Judaism. That was not my point. You wrote: Children of Jewish fathers but not raised in the Jewish religion (such as myself..) are generally not considered Jewish. True. But the children of Jewish mothers are identified as Jews until they embrace another faith. Just as the children of muslim fathers are identified as muslims. However, for many muslims, leaving the faith is a trickier business. You wrote:
63 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
It would appear that Obama Sr. walked away from Islam even before he got to the US. Nevertheless, at birth, Obama was a muslim, and from the ages of 6 to 10 he lived in a muslim country. Thus, his earliest religious identity was as a muslim. You wrote: From everything I have read about Obama and his family, if you absolutely want to pin a creed on him that came from his family it would be some variant of Socialism. Yes, his life experience has undoubtedly resulted in an embrace of Socialism. You wrote: As for hm being Muslim.. so far no whippings or beheadings in the Rose garden which might actually liven things up in the political sphere. Today, Obama is nominally a Christian. Meanwhile, my original point boiled down to the fact that from the ages of about 5 to 12, children are highly impressionable and do NOT have the ability to stop themselves from becoming immersed in and deeply influenced by their surroundings. With respect to whippings and beheadings, well, Obama has neglected to mention his opposition to these barbaric practices that are weekly events in Riyadh and other cities in the muslim world. In his case, his reticence comes across as tacit acceptance.
no_slappz colorofluv, you wrote:
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 15:44:40
Do you really think things would be different if McCain were in office? Historically, he voted more liberally than Obama. My original concern following Obamas election was the seeming power resulting from a Democratic White House and a Democratic majority in Congress. Initially I expected Obama to enjoy near dictatorial powers. However, I have been pleasantly surprised by the turn of events. More members of Congress than I would have estimated have recognized his ignorance of economics and financial reality. Unfortunately, he has managed to saddle the US with too much government spending which will require major tax increases sooner rather than later. He will have to jack up taxes before the end of his first term, and that will hopefully kill his chances for re-election. Meanwhile, when I envisioned a McCain presidency, I expected him, as a Republican president, to be in constant war with a Democratic Congress, leading to a series of stalemates inflicting little or no damage on the economy. Gridlock in Washington is good news for the economy. You wrote:
64 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
As for my honest political views: Were all victims of the Matrix. (If you havent seen the trilogy, watch it. It speaks volumes philosophically.) Scientology, the Bible and The Matrix proof that humans are more gullible than lemmings.
no_slappz eurasian sensation, Heres something for you to consider: Everything You Hear and See is Dawah from Indonesia..
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 18:05:27
Al-Tadarruj wa al-Tawazun (Gradual, Balanced and Proportional) The progressiveness and the expansiveness of the dawah movement of the party must be done gradually and proportionally, in accordance to the law of Allah (Sunnatullah) that governs the universe. The system of Islam stands on the principles of gradualism and balance. These principles are natural and will not be subjected to changes. Human beings by nature are created in graduation and balance. Therefore, all human acts, especially political acts, which are aimed at deviation from gradualism and balance, will lead to failure and, hence, they can be categorized as a crime towards humanity and the nature. Consequently, gradualism and balance have to underlie each and every activity of the Party, both in terms of its individual activists and its collective organization. 11. Al-Alamiyah (Part of Global Dawah) In principle, any Islamic dawah movement must have a global vision in parallel to the universality of Islam. This, indeed, has been the very nature of the dawah. It is an activity that is not limited to certain ethnics, or by state or regional boundaries. This recognition highlights that the existence of our dawah is part of the dawah activities around the globe. It is, therefore, essential that every policy made, program planned and step taken is in harmony with the international dawah strategy and follows the sunnatuddawah whilst not setting aside specific issues happening locally. Dawah, for the uninitiated, word Dawah in Arabic means to invite. When it is used in conjunction with Islam it is understood to mean inviting to the Way of submission and surrender to Allah.
ColorofLuv No-Slappz
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 18:14:22
Not sure you understood my analogy with the Matrix. It touches on so many issues that philosphers have dealt with through the ages. You get choice, free will, desitiny, fate, etc Contradictory, right? How can you have free will and fate at the same time. How can you be free and imprisoned at the same time?
65 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
What is your definition of Freedom? Free to make choices? What choices? Even if you are free to choose, your choices are based on limitations. Limitation that are IMPOSED by Society, the law, the economy, Global Trade, etc. Is it your choice, or the illusion of choice? Yeah, your free, but to what degree?
no_slappz colorofluv,
on Thu 4 Mar 2010 at 22:51:47
The Matrix series is a Hollywood version of some philosophical excursion. In other words, fantasy. Bottom line whatever your version of freedom happens to be, there is a place in the world where you can realize it. Thus, theres no point in dreaming about the boundaries of freedom, unless doing the dreaming is your idea of freedom. As far as limitations go, in the US and a number of other countries, limitations are self-imposed.
Eurasian Sensation @ slapper: and your point is?
on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 04:25:49
leigh204 @Eurasian Sensation: Thats just it. He has no point, but to blather on and on. Blah. Blah. Blah.
on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 04:29:55
peanut youre silly lol
on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 05:10:50
no_slappz eurasian sensation, Heres some news from Indonesia for you: INDONESIAN STUDENTS PROTEST BARACK OBAMAS VISIT Fri Mar 5, 7:53 am ET
on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 18:19:43
JAKARTA, Indonesia Scores of Islamic students staged protests outside Jakartas parliament and in at least three other major Indonesian cities on Friday against President Barack Obamas upcoming visit to this predominantly Muslim country. The students carried banners branding Obama as an enemy of Islam and an imperialist in downtown Jakarta as well as in the provincial capitals Padang, Yogyakarta and Surabaya.
66 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
They also threw shoes at large pictures of Obamas head. An Iraqi journalist was sentenced to a year in prison for throwing his shoes at U.S. President George W. Bush during a news conference in Baghdad in 2008. Protest organizer Ahmad Irhamul Fikri, spokesman for the Coordinating Board for Campus Proselytizing Institute, said bigger rallies will be staged next Friday in more Indonesian cities ahead of Obamas March 20-22 visit. Such demonstrations of hostility toward Obama are rare in Indonesia, where he enjoys widespread popularity because he spend part of his childhood in Jakarta while his mother was married to his Indonesian stepfather. Local government officials allowed business people to erect a statue of a 10-year-old Obama in a Jakarta park in December. But it was shifted last month to a nearby elementary school that he attended after more than 50,000 people supported a Facebook campaign against it and court action was threatened. Obama is expected to sign the statues pedestal while in Jakarta.
Uncle Milton To J:
on Fri 5 Mar 2010 at 18:47:15
Re: Sweden, point take about Swedens involvement in slave trade. I was not previously aware of it. As for Finland.. I guess that raises the question what responsibility would a conquered people have in regards to the behavior of their masters? Did the Filipinos profit from the Spaniards slavery because they were controlled by the Spanish empire during the time of the trans Atlantic slave trade? I would suspect the answer would be no.
Eurasian Sensation @ no_slappz:
on Sat 6 Mar 2010 at 01:13:20
but gee,dont they know hes a muslim just like them? After all, isnt that what youve been telling us? What scores of protesters do in a nation of 200 million is hardly relevant to anything. If your continual comments sent my way are trying to point out to me that Indonesia has some shitty people and has a lot of problems, Im sorry but I already know.
Vindicator on Fri 12 Mar 2010 at 00:23:03 Hey guys Im back! Did you miss me? I see the toolish troll no_slappz is still chatting c***! I also see that Uncle Milton is back. At least when he disagrees with Abagond he uses logical comments and backs it up with some evidence unlike no_slappz!
leigh204 @Vindicator:
67 of 79
on Fri 12 Mar 2010 at 00:35:49
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Welcome back! Howre you? And your presence or lack thereof was certainly missed, at least, by yours truly.
Vindicator on Fri 12 Mar 2010 at 00:51:25 @leigh204: Im cool just had some computer probs (still do but at least its working for now!) Man, I missed talking to the pretty ladies!
Vindicator on Fri 12 Mar 2010 at 01:12:03 As to the question how white america got rich Its a combination of many things! Ultimately, wealth has always been spread around the world Now The U.S.A. is the top dog for wealth. a century or 2 ago it was us Brits. Persia, China, The Arab world (Including Babylon and Mesopotamia) have all been top dogs for wealth as well etc. Soon enough China will be top dog for wealth. After that who bloody knows! I should expect a comment from the trollish tool soon enough!
Eric on Thu 8 Apr 2010 at 23:09:29 I suggest that you read White Cargo: The Forgotten History of Britains White Slaves in America 2008, NYU Press by Don Kirkland and Michael Walsh. This book will lighten your perspective on windfalls while giving a bit more informed explanation as to how a lot of white people ended up in America. I also suggest that you familiarize yourself with the nasty, paycheck to paycheck (i.e. masters giving slaves not wages but slave expenses) labor that whites have done in places like Americas steel mills and coal mines, etc. Theres a little thing known as the white working class thats been propping up the miniscule American elite class since day one. Do you really see it as a privilege to do that work? Well then, be my guest. What a shame it is to see another person cop to the divide and conquer tactics of the tiny percentage of ruling elites. Now listen carefully, if we start viewing people based on economic class instead of on race, golly, we might actually be able to come together and topple those motherfuckers right off of their gilded shitters. You know what I mean? But no, its cats like you that have to go around stirring up the race hate. Face it asshole. You hate white people more than you claim they hate you, and that hate penetrates so deep that you know the truth but prefer to ignore it because it so conveniently panders to that hate. Come on. Admit it. You know its true. Even if the media and academia hadnt been slanting your perception, brainwashing you since the day you were born, youd still be jealous of, I mean hate white people.
abagond Eric: Why do you think I hate white people?
on Thu 8 Apr 2010 at 23:37:44
68 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Herneith on Fri 9 Apr 2010 at 00:45:49 we might actually be able to come together and topple those motherfuckers right off of their gilded shitters. Do you eat with that mouth? Face it asshole. Since you love invoking anuses, heres one for you: Blow it out your rectum!
The Great White Man Simple, my friends A Diamond to a WHITE man is a pretty rock to the African
on Sun 18 Apr 2010 at 14:22:56
Many valuable things in colonized lands were just common everyday things to Natives, they would just step right over it without thinking. The White mans knowledge of these items and the ability to get them collected, processed and shipped back to europe is pretty much the driving force behind our riches. and since the GLOBAL ECONOMY was basically built by the WHITE MAN..Put 2 to 2 together
Herneith Put 2 to 2 together I am mathematically challenged, please explain.
on Sun 18 Apr 2010 at 18:21:20
Timothy Brunner Asian Americans are richer per capita than white Americans. Jewish Americans are the richest per capita. Where are the articles about them? Or maybe you just hate white Americans?
on Fri 21 May 2010 at 23:20:35
Mira White Man, You have no idea what youre talking about.
on Fri 21 May 2010 at 23:38:27
Its clear why whites became so rich, and it wasnt due to their intelligence. (Im not saying whites are stupid, but the intelligence is not what made them more successful.)
Thaddeus
on Fri 21 May 2010 at 23:56:15
69 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Be careful, Tim: GWM might just start reciting the old saw that the jews are a parasitic race which takes over Aryan-formed civilizations. Folks, this Whites created civilization viewpoint was first launched by Arthur Gobineau back in the mid-19th century and was further refined by Galton, the father of eugenics. The concept had no scientific basis then and it has none now. It was most family put to political work by A. Hitler in the 1930s and 40s. The only thing interesting about GWMs rhetoric is how it re-warms the old notion of Aryan supremacy. GWMs marginally smart enough not to spout that sosrt of trash, but its essentially the same deal. Boil it down to its particulars, Aryanism and GWMs view are the same: all that is good in human civilization was built by one race and one race only and that race is now in danger of losing its special proclivities due to being overwhelmed by its inferiors. Read Madison Grants The Passing of the Great Race, the book Hitler declared to be my Bible, and youll find GWMs opinions in an unadorned nutshell.
J After reading your comments Thad, I was reminded that GWM said that he liked dark Black women This board is becoming stranger than the Twilight Zone Lights, roll, action: On comes Abagond dressed in a suit with a tie to tell us:
on Sat 22 May 2010 at 00:06:12
Mira on Sat 22 May 2010 at 00:12:21 I might be mistaken, but there seems to be a lot of white racists who like (dark) black women. I am
70 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
not sure if the same can be said for female racists and black men.
J Yes is the answer, to female racist and Black men
on Sat 22 May 2010 at 00:16:35
Mira Thats interesting
on Sat 22 May 2010 at 01:12:59
Y on Sat 22 May 2010 at 01:42:55 Mira is right, maybe it has to do with sexual aggression,love-hate thing. Ive had the misfortune of running into a lot of them on YouTube. That or they hate black men but not black women Same goes for white women, and other ethnicities as well
Ankhesen Mi on Sat 22 May 2010 at 01:43:50 I am not sure if the same can be said for female racists and black men. Surewhy not? This way, they can get the Mandingo fantasy sex and cry rape against one, and/or pin kidnapping charges on an imaginary anothereither way, innocent black men get put at risk.
Ankhesen Mi *other, not another
on Sat 22 May 2010 at 01:44:34
Y A Diamond to a WHITE man is a pretty rock to the African
on Sat 22 May 2010 at 01:46:38
Many valuable things in colonized lands were just common everyday things to Natives, they would just step right over it without thinking. The White mans knowledge of these items and the ability to get them collected, processed and shipped back to europe is pretty much the driving force behind our riches. The white man didnt have knowledge of shit They just saw those rocks and attributed value to them besides flossing what other purpose does solidified carbon have?
Y Timmy Brunner sez: Asian Americans are richer per capita than white Americans. Jewish Americans are the richest per capita. Where are the articles about them? Or maybe you just hate white Americans?
71 of 79
on Sat 22 May 2010 at 01:51:21
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Asian American have the highest per capital HOUSEHOLD income, important to note. Why?: 1. Asian Americans tend to have more people living in one house than other ethnicity, more people=more income 2. Most Asian Americans live in cities with high costs of living(San Fran, NYC, Boston, ect) Another thing: White men get paid more than Asian men. and Jews are white.
J on Mon 24 May 2010 at 22:21:12 Massive Race Divide: Blacks Will Never Gain Wealth Equality With Whites Under The Current System The Black Agenda Report By Glen Ford http://www.countercurrents.org/ford240510.htm
randell on Mon 11 Apr 2011 at 20:57:37 B. R. im sorry but your incorrect if a white man and a black man apply for the same job. the job will go to who ever is better equiped to do the job. there are laws against not hiring someone because of color or religion. in many cases blacks will get hired before a white man because the individual doing the hiring doesnt want to be accused of being racist. and that is a fact. studies also show that black woman have more purchasing power then white woman
Eurasian Sensation @ Randell:
on Tue 12 Apr 2011 at 04:30:59
Studies have shown that a job applicant is significantly more likely to get called to an interview if he/she has a name that sounds white. An applicant with a identifiably black name (ie. DeWayne, etc) is less likely to get an interview even if they have the exact same resume. The same goes for people with Muslim names, Asian names, etc etc.
Guilty Bystander on Fri 6 May 2011 at 02:43:20 I would say this post is about 90 percent accurate, but once again, Abagond, please read MORE history, and youll have a better argument. First off, its a common mistake to see white people as a monolithic power-wielding group and also to assume every white immigrant came here of their own volition. Millions of whites were actually indentured servants, or, especially in the case of the Irish, slaves or virtual slaves. One of the reasons Africa was chosen as a source of slave labor was because it was easier to catch blacks who
72 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
ran away than whites because whites could blend into the general population. Hence, over time, black slavery supplanted white slavery (and Indian slavery) in the New World. Secondly, most property-less whites did not have the right to vote when the country began, and universal white male suffrage only happened in the early 19th century, followed ostensibly by universal black male suffrage after the Civil War which was quickly derailed after Union troops were withdrawn from the South. Of course, most of us know the history of suffrage of women and AfricanAmericans after that. It is completely true that blacks were economically shut out of the American pie, so to speak, although, ironically, their incomes were rising up until Lyndon Johnsons Great Society actually set in motion forces that set back black advancement. Yes, affirmative action benefited SOME blacks economically and socially, but the welfare system destroyed black family life by punishing AfricanAmerican familes which remained intact with fathers and rewarding single motherhood. Its an unintentional error of the system that is only just beginning to be rectified. Had welfare been designed to reward poor people for moving up the ladder, and not merely throwing them a bone when they are at the bottom, it could have radically altered the course of urban black America in the 1970s and 80s, not to mention rural white America, which is STILL the primary recipient of welfare. Unlike most whites, I support economic reparations for the black community to make up for segregated housing policies and others that have destroyed black economic well being. However, I also believe that until the African-American community repudiates the criminal element too many pop stars and others celebrate, any economic investment could actually backfire. White non-Protestant immigrant groups like the Irish and Italians only gained a secure foothold in America when they began buying land and valuing literacy. It is sad that our government actually worked AGAINST blacks doing so for decades, but that has changed and the time is now for African-Americans to make a concerted effort to organize and educate themselves in order to avail themselves of the legally protected rights that were secured for them in the Civil Rights era.
King @ Guilty
on Fri 6 May 2011 at 03:55:45
Unlike most whites, I support economic reparations for the black community to make up for segregated housing policies and others that have destroyed black economic well being. However, I also believe that until the African-American community repudiates the criminal element too many pop stars and others celebrate, any economic investment could actually backfire. I assure you that most Blacks DO repudiate the criminal elements. But just as Whites cant control the louder voices of Charlie Sheen, Kid Rock, or Eminem, Blacks cant control the celebrities who love to embrace gangsterism. The average Black person doesnt have much of an opportunity where his/her views are made known.
Awryguy Abagond:
on Sat 21 May 2011 at 15:18:25
There are white countries, and even some Asian ones, where people are just as well off as White Americans without enjoying any of these windfalls.
73 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
Its interesting that you mention Japan, which at the end of the 20th century stood as the worlds 2nd largest economy without having enjoyed any of the 3 windfalls to which you attribute Americas wealth. Speaking of those windfalls, the third: Money: much of the wealth of the British Empire. The British Empire went broke fighting Hitler. Where do you think most of that money went? To America, nearly all of it to White Americans. The infusion of money from Britain went in large part to the American industrial sector, specifically the Northeast. Those were jobs available to black workers, especially when America entered the war and the draft cleared the labour pool. I suspect they usually werent paid, promoted or treated as well as white workers, but nonetheless a lot of African-Americans bought their first houses with their salary from the assembly line. Black America got a larger share of that wealth than any previous infusion. I think a sober step back reveals a lot missing from the picture youve painted. America became a rich and powerful nation on the backs of African slaves, but thats not the story of the 20th century. Nor is it the simple transfer of colonial wealth from the British Empire to the American. The spectacular wealth generated by America in the last century was created by the greatest minds on the planet working in a surprisingly free country. America is rich because Americans invented the assembly line, the airplane, the computer and the internet, not to mention revenue generating monsters like Hollywood, Wall Street (well, most of the time) and the entire goddamn fast food industry. Oh, and Walmart and Exxon-Mobil. THATS how white America got rich.
Bobby H on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 17:09:51 Im white and not rich. I have a full-time job but live in a studio rental and dont even own a car. Please tell me where I can get my money. Is there a white bank account that I dont know about? And can I get a credit card for that account? Or am I supposed to somehow get my money from non-whites? Again, please tell me because it wasnt clear in your post.
abagond on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 17:14:19 The post is about White America in general, not about every single White American. Some whites live in poverty, everyone knows that. That fact does not disprove any of my points.
King @ Bobby
on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 17:32:57
Im white and not rich. I have a full-time job but live in a studio rental and dont even own a car. Please tell me where I can get my money. Is there a white bank account that I dont know about? Yes, actually, there is. http://www.whitestatebank.com/
74 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
King ^ A case of meeting an argument on its own level of intelligence.
on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 17:39:47
Bobby H on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 19:51:32 Well, obviously my post was a little joke. But the whole post above is a bit of a joke too. There is no big pile of gold that is controlled by and for white people. Fortunes are lost as quick as they come and the notion that rich white people somehow give their money to other white people is questionable. The biggest gift Im aware off is the one from Bill Gates and Warren Buffet who donate their entire fortune to charity, mostly for health causes in Africa and to improve education for poor people in the US. Anyway, just look at the Forbes list of richest people in the US. There is no old money there. In fact, the oldest fortune in the top 10 is from the Walton empire and that was started in the 50s. Simply put, the richest people in the US earned it by being smarter, faster and probably more ruthless then the next guy. Now, there is no denying that the richest people are virtually all white males and Im 100% sure many white males get a head start in life probably something to do with a culture of education, intellectual competitiveness, emphasis on manners and adapting to the environment. Im also a 100% sure that if youre an aspiring black entrepreneur youll have more obstacles to overcome and more ignorant people to convince and that is unfair and unfortunate. However, that is not the same as as a conspiracy theory of whites keeping their claws on their white gold for the last couple of hundred years. Source: http://www.forbes.com/wealth/forbes-400/list PS. As a weird aside, ending the black-on-black slave trade was used a major political reason (or excuse?) by European countries for colonizing Africa in the 1880s.
King on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 21:20:18 Bobby, its not a case of most Blacks believing that its *impossible* to succeed, or that being White alone is a guaranteed ride to Fort Knox. But have a look again at what Abagonds points from a slightly different perspective. Labor: Whites have had, and continue to have much better access to great jobs simply because most of the people who have great jobs are already White. Often, people dont even realize that theyre being exclusive. But when you ask if anyone knows of someone who would make a good receptionist, summer intern, or part-time assistant (to a room full of mostly White employees) this query, is most likely going to get you more White people referred, simply because thats who other White people mostly know. Multiply that several thousands of times on every level, and you begin to see one small example of how it is much easier as a White person to get a job. Money: If you and your family are more likely to have the inside line of getting better jobs, then you will also tend to make more money (sometimes dramatically so). Which means that you have a much better shot at being ready for and being able to afford, a good education, which again puts you on top. You are also more likely to be a homeowner, which means that you have greater means of financing large costs against real collateral and that your housing costs have a tendency not to go up
75 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
nearly as quickly as renters. This too is a great advantage. Land: And, of course, if your parents owned their home (much more probable with Whites than with Blacks) then at some point they may leave the home to their children. Many times, White middle-agers benefit from six figure inheritances, based on the sale of a house that their parents bought when they were children. Blacks (who own homes at a much lower rate, and often on less valuable properties) inherit large sums less frequently. And of course, if your parents are accustomed to managing, investing and saving money, then you will have a huge advantage as those skills are passed down to you. However, if your parents financial expertise is in making ends meet on relatively low income then they may know well how to survive when poor, but may have little to pass on about how to become rich and stay rich. but all of these patterns reach back to hundreds of years of injustice that set the pattern. i think that is what Abagond is getting at.
abagond on Tue 23 Aug 2011 at 21:37:31 No, that is not what I am getting at. I am saying they got rich from the barrel of a gun pointed at Native Americans to take their land, pointed at blacks to take their labour and pointed at some others too. This post is not about race and social mobility and saving pennies. It is about race and violence and history.
abagond Bobby H said:
on Wed 24 Aug 2011 at 08:29:54
PS. As a weird aside, ending the black-on-black slave trade was used a major political reason (or excuse?) by European countries for colonizing Africa in the 1880s. Right, whatever would Africans do without the help of Europeans: http://abagond.wordpress.com/2011/02/03/an-open-letter-to-king-leopold-ii/
V-4 on Wed 28 Sep 2011 at 19:41:58 Inregards to Disney/TV affecting most christians world view; as much as people can be affected by their religions..nowadays when people say thats what religion I am pretty much what they really mean is thats the church I dont go to. And considering how much hours of television watch and the attempts at being multicultural/inclusive..I could see TV having an affect on what people belief, most people base their view point touched by an Angel more than on the Bible these days. For upword mobility of black people; arent something like 90% of black immigrants successful, I think they are supposed to be highly educated but still. That does seem to imply that if you desire to achieve it can be done, I mean it may suck to be getting paid 60-70 thousand when whites in similiar positions might be getting paid a 100thousand but its still got to be better than getting paid 15 or 30 thousand.
76 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
As for why not as many African-Americans pursue these avenues; could it be cultural..like one of the things I here is that initially many of the black college applicants when they start out in college are at a lower level of IQ but by the end of it test out as either comparable or superior to othersso is it possible negative influences from family, friends etc.are contributing to an anti-intellectual atmosphere? As for why Africans dont have wealth; well alot of its been stolen over the years and transfered to various other countries but one thing I recall hearing about was how there was at least one country that due to various aspects we set up in dealings etc.over the years that we get something like 70% of their yearly income. Dont know if thats true or even which country that was but its something to think about. White people and racism, I think most of the time they dont try to justify things via the various thoughts as posted here inregards to natives etc.honestly most of the time I dont think they actually think that much about life in general, they just watch tv, go to work, eat at burger king and enjoy themselves. Most people are too self-focused to either no or worry about someone elses pain or suffering. That said when confronted with these issues; what theyve been told over the years, plus whatever issues with racism they have plus wanting not to feel bad all do contribute to their argument. That and just mind blowing amounts of ignorance. One of the things mentioned ealier was race vs class and moving up; I think part of the reason people dont fight class as much is because they all have hopes of moving up and getting rich, so fingers crossed in the long run doing something that goes against the higher class and rich goes against their own potential interests. Of course considering how often things being directed against the lower class have pretty much a non-beniegn affected on minorities as a whole kind of make that a paradoxical hope to have but there you go. Can women who date black women be racists? Yes; interestingly enough I believe that studies have been done that indicate overweight women are more likely to be racist than moderate or underweight women. But it seems like the more overweight low class sorts are who alot of the black men go out with. If I had to guestimate I would say its their own low self esteem making them aim for lower in the thought it increases their odds when in reality going for the better looking women probably increases their odds. As for welfare ironically punishing the poor, why do you assume it wasnt intended to do that? If your rich, the last thing you want is more potential competition challenging you for your hard earning wealth and resources, that and republicans pretty much have a 24/7 hatefest on the poor, they dont want them to achieve upward mobility, they want them to stay poor and work for them. Beyond that; sorry for the super-long post.
V-4 on Wed 28 Sep 2011 at 20:07:09 One more thought about why white people might deny racism or privileges; egotism. If you are racist; than admitting that white people have privileges means having to entertain the thought that if black people do comparable to you or even remotely close means they have to be at least equal and quite possibly superior in those situations.
77 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
That and it also means that despite having white male privilege that you havent done all that much in your life with all those advantages..kind of a blow to the ego there. Its bad enough to do poorly in life, its even worse to do so when you realize you have a leg up on everybody else.
aeduclos@msn.com This blogger is a pot-stirrer. She does not desire change.
on Fri 7 Oct 2011 at 23:32:54
Coryb on Mon 10 Oct 2011 at 07:41:22 This is racest all in its self, we just elected a black man as president !! yinz think whitey still racest , yall can kiss the WHITEST part of my A s s Word G
Reparations Gucci Little Piggy on Sun 11 Dec 2011 at 19:38:38 [...] Until then whites will continue to be screwed up and remain racist because deep down they know their lives are a fraud. Racism lives on, continuing to damage the lives of people of colour, because it is a morphine drip [...]
How White America got rich | Abagond | Community Village Daily on Tue 24 Jul 2012 at 08:37:08 Activist | Scoop.it [...] "How did White America become so rich? Those hard-working, pull-themselves-up-by-theirbootstraps White Americans experienced at least three windfalls in their history" [...]
szpiritz on Sun 12 Aug 2012 at 13:15:59 You gotta realize fast that nothing is going to change by writing an article, start finding a more practicle way that really is going to change something in reality. You can shout all you want and you can be very angry , but that is not going to matter even a bit. I am not White and I am not Black either.. This world needs a real hard soul breaking punch, not a classroom lesson. The question left is only whether you can make that punch I love your article thanks.
grin and bear it on Mon 25 Feb 2013 at 20:32:25 Well, here it is. The slave holders were paid reparations, while the slaves could only grin and bear it.
wolfkin on Thu 18 Jul 2013 at 00:52:21 why on earth did their forefathers leave Europe to live the rest of their lives in a foreign land across the ocean? Because they knew that hard work and the right values were not enough in themselves, not by a long shot. Dont get me wrong I understand your stance and I mostly agree with it but this segment is wrong. The narrative is that white people moved from Europe because (for instance) the Monarchy was inhibiting the righteous path of Hard Work -> Good Wealth. Its part of the narrative of WHY America is so special because it IS a place where you can work hard and reap rewards.
78 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM
I just think you should have your lies correct.
Herneith on Thu 18 Jul 2013 at 02:07:48 Quit your lying. The original immigrants from Europe were thieves, rapists, religious fanatics and other assorted arseholes. Obviously, you have been feed a load of bullocks! Make no mistake, you are still a part of the British Empire but are too dumb to know it. I guess being stupid is part and parcel with being inherently criminal as your ancestors were.
Comments RSS
Blog at WordPress.com. The MistyLook Theme.
Follow
Follow Abagond
Powered by WordPress.com
79 of 79
7/21/2013 11:31 PM

How White America Got Rich

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

How White America Got Rich

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

How White America got rich | Abagond