Right wingers: Are you racist?

TurtleDude said:

TL DR. when you claim the truth stings, and there was no truth, I stopped reading the tome you posted.

Click to expand...

While I must say, the above does give credence to the modern-day axiom: "If you want to hide something from a conservative, put it in writing"....that's not the issue in this case.

LOL, Who are you kidding, TD? You read every word of it.

But it's ok, it's a free board, right? You're allowed to crawfish your way of a discussion any way you choose. This particular way isn't very clever, but......

You are free to go.

ultmd said:

While I must say, the above does give credence to the modern-day axiom: "If you want to hide something from a conservative, put it in writing"....that's not the issue in this case.

LOL, Who are you kidding, TD? You read every word of it.

But it's ok, it's a free board, right? You're allowed to crawfish your way of a discussion any way you choose. This particular way isn't very clever, but......

You are free to go.

Click to expand...

I come and go without leave from you. and no, I didn't read that long winded nonsense

TurtleDude said:

I come and go without leave from you.

Click to expand...

Of course you do. :wink2:

and no, I didn't read that long winded nonsense

Click to expand...

Of course you didn't. :wink2:

But I don't have much interest in casual conversation with you. So, since you're unable to respond substantively to my assessment of the sweeping generalization you made about "liberals" based soley upon your personal recollections of a conversation you had with a single "white liberal" 30-some years ago...and since it is now obvious that your entire "where were the liberal protests about IdI Amin" fit-of-pique was also nothing more than a screed of your own biased, right-wing opinions...you may consider yourself free to discontinue this dialogue with me, TD.

ultmd said:

Of course you do. :wink2:



Of course you didn't. :wink2:

But I don't have much interest in casual conversation with you. So, since you're unable to respond substantively to my assessment of the sweeping generalization you made about "liberals" based soley upon your personal recollections of a conversation you had with a single "white liberal" 30-some years ago...and since it is now obvious that your entire "where were the liberal protests about IdI Amin" fit-of-pique was also nothing more than a screed of your own biased, right-wing opinions...you may consider yourself free to discontinue this dialogue with me, TD.

Click to expand...

that's just inane nonsense. why were so many white liberals outraged over Rhodesia and RSA but said nothing about murderous regimes in many parts of sub-saharan Africa? Why do so many white liberals whine about the NRA but not black on black violence?

TurtleDude said:

that's just inane nonsense. why were so many white liberals outraged over Rhodesia and RSA but said nothing about murderous regimes in many parts of sub-saharan Africa?

Click to expand...

:roll:...so I guess we're speaking again? Geez, man. Make up your mind.

So now...Who says "white liberals said nothing"? You? :lamo Dude, you were barely more than a snot-nosed 18 year old yourself back then, remember? And yet, here again, you offer up absurd, fact-free, right-wing OPINIONS as if they are known, accepted facts.

The premise of your argument is a falsehood...a LIE. And your opinions do not matter when your own argument is one that must be predicated upon an objective FACT. But the FACT is that there was a LOT of attention and outrage, but apparently none of it made its way into your entitled neck of the woods, huh?

Why do so many white liberals whine about the NRA but not black on black violence?

Click to expand...

Another false premise. Same song, second verse. It's just pure right wing emotionalism, and not much else.

But in this case.....what in the world does "black on black violence" have to do with anything? The funny thing is that I'm sure you have fabricated your own, fact-free answers to all of your own questions. And they are all "true" because you believe them to be true, right?:lamo

But let's do this: Would you also like to talk about white on white crime? You do know that whites commit violence against whites at close to the same rate that blacks commit violence against blacks, don't you? The rate of white on white violent crime is 12.5 per 1000 (and trending UPWARD), while the rate of black on black violent crime is 16 per 1000 (and trending DOWNWARD). So, tell me, Turtledude why don't white conservatives ever talk about white on white crime? And why is it that white conservatives like you are always so quick to bring up "black on black violence", rather than tending to the very similar white on white violence that exists in their own communities, huh?

Please, be as candid as you can with me in your response.

Similarly, the rate or black-on-white violent crime is only 3.1 per 1000, while the rate of white-on-black violence is 2.8 per 1000. Put another way, about 85% of all violent crimes against white people are committed by white "thugs". For African-Americans, it's about 90%. Based upon the way violence is covered by the mass media...and based upon the way white conservatives constantly promote the "black on black crime" problem....one would think that the violent crime is not the UNIVERSAL problem (one that exists in near equal proportions across racial lines) that it truly is.

ultmd said:

The fact here is that you are being way too sensitive. But you are the same Grim17 who echoed agreement with HBTN's ridiculous misrpresetations of "racism" and "racist behavior in post #339, aren't you?

Click to expand...

I agreed with the following statement:

Any white person who insists on maintaining 'white privilege' is a racist. Those white people who embrace that position are the fairly rare exception, are by no means mainstream, or typical of modern day American white people and they are definitely on the fringe. They certainly do not represent the modern day Republican Party nor are they in any way typical of the American right wing.

You consider that statement "ridiculous"?

EVEN IF THEY WERE ACCURATE AND TRUE (and they definitely were NOT). And yet, you finished that post by calling them "textbook racism", for Pete's sake. :lamo

Click to expand...

If in response to a post made by a black person, I said the following:

"Spoken like a typically clueless black person. This is why we (whites) don't trust you people."

That's labeling black people as typically "clueless" (aka stupid, dumb, unintelligent, etc...) and to be considered untrustworthy (aka dishonest, liars, lacking integrity, etc...) to all non-blacks.

Are you going to tell me that such a statement wouldn't be racist, because it certainly is in my book? Just switch out the 2 words in red with the words "white" and "minorities", an you have the statement I was referring to.

Thanks again. I read it the first time. Your point was that you've been on the other end of racial violence in the past. I saw that. But I'm sorry, getting beat up as a white kid by a group of older black kids, while unfortunate, doesn't mean you understand racism...any more than assisting a surgeon during an operation would mean that you understand surgery. Your experience was a fractional glimpse through the window. "Knowing" racism isn't a one-time experience. You can't "know" racism like you "know" DisneyWorld after taking a trip.

Click to expand...

You said I didn't experience racism, and that was one of many examples proving that I have. In both 5th and 8th grade I experienced entire school years being discriminated against because I was white. I had many black and hispanic teachers throughout my school years, but those 2 particular years I had a black woman and mexican born man for homeroom who both harbored animosity toward white children and acted upon it by way of discrimination. I also saw it work the other way around with white teachers discriminating against black kids, so don't paint me as some kind privileged white man who has lived a sheltered life protected from the ways of the world. FFS man, do you even know where I'm writing this post from? I'm writing this from my place in Sonora Mexico, where I've lived 5 months a year for the past 22 years.

Although I've both experienced and witnessed racism first hand, a person does not have to experience it to understand what it is. It is a plainly and clearly defined term and there's nothing abstract about it.

The bottom line is that if you don't understand what it's like to live with brown skin every day of your life, you should not get into arguments about what is, or is not, real racism.

Click to expand...

Let me get this straight... Because I'm white, I can't possibly know what racism is and therefore should just STFU. I've watched that narrative gain steam over the last several years where white people and conservatives in general, are more and more being strong armed out of any conversation concerning racism. I've also seen what that has resulted in... A slow but steady push to broaden the definition of "racism" and what qualifies as racist behavior, while at the same time fighting to preserve the negative stigma and severe consequences that people who are branded a racist will suffer.

Sorry pal, but I won't stand by and allow the political left and their supporters to bastardize the English language for personal and political gain. Racism today is defined exactly the way it was 40 years ago and I understand the meaning perfectly, so if you think I'm going to allow people like yourself to intimidate me into silence and redefine the meaning of racism, you've got another thing coming.

.

ultmd said:

:roll:...so I guess we're speaking again? Geez, man. Make up your mind.

So now...Who says "white liberals said nothing"? You? :lamo Dude, you were barely more than a snot-nosed 18 year old yourself back then, remember? And yet, here again, you offer up absurd, fact-free, right-wing OPINIONS as if they are known, accepted facts.

The premise of your argument is a falsehood...a LIE. And your opinions do not matter when your own argument is one that must be predicated upon an objective FACT. But the FACT is that there was a LOT of attention and outrage, but apparently none of it made its way into your entitled neck of the woods, huh?



Another false premise. Same song, second verse. It's just pure right wing emotionalism, and not much else.

But in this case.....what in the world does "black on black violence" have to do with anything? The funny thing is that I'm sure you have fabricated your own, fact-free answers to all of your own questions. And they are all "true" because you believe them to be true, right?:lamo

But let's do this: Would you also like to talk about white on white crime? You do know that whites commit violence against whites at close to the same rate that blacks commit violence against blacks, don't you? The rate of white on white violent crime is 12.5 per 1000 (and trending UPWARD), while the rate of black on black violent crime is 16 per 1000 (and trending DOWNWARD). So, tell me, Turtledude why don't white conservatives ever talk about white on white crime? And why is it that white conservatives like you are always so quick to bring up "black on black violence", rather than tending to the very similar white on white violence that exists in their own communities, huh?

Please, be as candid as you can with me in your response.

Similarly, the rate or black-on-white violent crime is only 3.1 per 1000, while the rate of white-on-black violence is 2.8 per 1000. Put another way, about 85% of all violent crimes against white people are committed by white "thugs". For African-Americans, it's about 90%. Based upon the way violence is covered by the mass media...and based upon the way white conservatives constantly promote the "black on black crime" problem....one would think that the violent crime is not the UNIVERSAL problem (one that exists in near equal proportions across racial lines) that it truly is.

Click to expand...

6% of the population in the USA is where more than half the murderers come from.

ultmd said:

So, since you're unable to respond substantively to my assessment of the sweeping generalization you made about "liberals" based soley upon your personal recollections of a conversation you had with a single "white liberal" 30-some years ago.

Click to expand...

So how many conversations with white liberals does one need to have before you will consider that he is not "making a sweeping generalization" about liberals?

Grim17 said:

I agreed with the following statement...You consider that statement "ridiculous"?

Click to expand...

That wasn't the statement in question. But yes, it's ridiculous because it demonstrates that you don't understand the concept of implicit bias. If you did, you'd understand that white privilege isn't something that white people can "embrace" or reject. In addition, the simple FACT is that white conservatives who identify with the GOP consistently score HIGHEST on implicit bias tests. So your statement, above, is wrong on multiple levels.

Are you going to tell me that such a statement wouldn't be racist, because it certainly is in my book? Just switch out the 2 words in red with the words "white" and "minorities", an you have the statement I was referring to.

Click to expand...

.
Yes. It's absolutely NOT "racist". You're proving my point. Again, you've got "racism" and "racist" confused with other things, which is a big part of the reason why those terms are so overused.

... so don't paint me as some kind privileged white man who has lived a sheltered life protected from the ways of the world.

Click to expand...

I have made no such suggestion. What I have stated is that the issue of racism is about much more than just the isolated, overt acts that you've described. You're making the same mistake as a lot of people who misuse or misrepresent those terms .

FFS man, do you even know where I'm writing this post from? I'm writing this from my place in Sonora Mexico, where I've lived 5 months a year for the past 22 years.

Click to expand...

...and...??? What do you think that means? What does it have to do with anything you've written in this thread previously?

Although I've both experienced and witnessed racism first hand, a person does not have to experience it to understand what it is. It is a plainly and clearly defined term and there's nothing abstract about it.

Click to expand...

Wrong. This is just contrary to all common sense. Again, it's not the dictionary definition that is in question here. The issue here is how racism presents itself; because that's all that really matters. The definition of racism is clear: discriminating against someone on the basis of their racial identity. But the MANIFESTATIONS of racism are very much abstract, as exemplified by the huge divergence in the way minorities and whites perceive the issue of racism (both the interpersonal and institutional forms) in terms of prevalence and severity. If there were 'nothing abstract about it" (as you argue), everyone would always agree on it. There would be no disparities in the criminal justice system for things like illegal drug use. But again, they do not. And if you grant that not all disagreements about racism are due to malevolence on one (or both) sides, then it's clear that there is A LOT of "abstract" interpretation involved. And that's where experiences come into play. Another thing to understand is that words aren't "racist". Actions (and the net effect of actions) can be racist. Words can be a lot of things: bigoted, prejudiced, insenstive, ignorant, etc....but they are not, in and of themselves, "racist". Bigotry and/or implicit racial bias, when acted upon, are "racism". So I'm not sure why you keep making this specious argument, over and over.

Let me get this straight... Because I'm white, I can't possibly know what racism is and therefore should just STFU.

Click to expand...

Not at all. What you should do is learn to listen more, and judge less. Because if you haven't LIVED it every day, your perspective is going to be different...and your perspective will be different is because of the depth of your experiences (or lack there of) is different than someone who LIVES with it in his/her daily life.

I've watched that narrative gain steam over the last several years...

Click to expand...

LOL, I'm not sure what you've been seeing over the last few years, but it's a full 180 degrees different from what I've been seeing.

Sorry pal, but I won't stand by and allow the political left and their supporters to bastardize the English language for personal and political gain. Racism today is defined exactly the way it was 40 years ago and I understand the meaning perfectly, so if you think I'm going to allow people like yourself to intimidate me into silence and redefine the meaning of racism, you've got another thing coming

Click to expand...

LOL, I have absolutely no interest in "intimidating" you, so let's NOT pretend that you and other white folk are the real victims in this debate, ok? But again...........THIS is why I keep telling you that you don't understand racism. It's a LOT more prevalent and insidious than what you experienced in middle school

Wan said:

So how many conversations with white liberals does one need to have before you will consider that he is not "making a sweeping generalization" about liberals?

Click to expand...

More than one, for starters.

Even better would be to spare us the personal anecdotes as "accepted facts", in general.

TurtleDude said:

6% of the population in the USA is where more than half the murderers come from.

Click to expand...

LOL, so your response to the following challenge and series of questions from me:

But let's do this: Would you also like to talk about white on white crime? You do know that whites commit violence against whites at close to the same rate that blacks commit violence against blacks, don't you? The rate of white on white violent crime is 12.5 per 1000 (and trending UPWARD), while the rate of black on black violent crime is 16 per 1000 (and trending DOWNWARD). So, tell me, Turtledude why don't white conservatives ever talk about white on white crime? And why is it that white conservatives like you are always so quick to bring up "black on black violence", rather than tending to the very similar white on white violence that exists in their own communities, huh?

Click to expand...

....is to offer up another tangential alt-right reference.

How completely predictable was that, huh?:lamo

I think this has been a good exercise for us. You've effectively identified yourself for what you really are...and that's a good thing for us, going forward. Clearly, you and your ilk have neither interest nor concern about "inner city crime" or anything else that effects some African-Americans. You're also not interested in discussing the FACT that white on white crime is almost as big a scourge in our society as black on black crime. Apparently, that was a bit too much for you to handle, huh?

No, what you and your alt-right brethren care about are empty-headed talking points and insults. It's just what you people do, because it's who you people are.

ultmd said:

LOL, so your response to the following challenge and series of questions from me:



....is to offer up another tangential alt-right reference.

How completely predictable was that, huh?:lamo

I think this has been a good exercise for us. You've effectively identified yourself for what you really are...and that's a good thing for us, going forward. Clearly, you and your ilk have neither interest nor concern about "inner city crime" or anything else that effects some African-Americans. You're also not interested in discussing the FACT that white on white crime is almost as big a scourge in our society as black on black crime. Apparently, that was a bit too much for you to handle, huh?

No, what you and your alt-right brethren care about are empty-headed talking points and insults. It's just what you people do, because it's who you people are.

Click to expand...

how does that nonsense respond to what I said.
white on white crime is a far smaller per capita issue than black crime

that's the point

TurtleDude said:

how does that nonsense respond to what I said.
white on white crime is a far smaller per capita issue than black crime

that's the point

Click to expand...

It's widely accepted in conservative circles that the cause of crime is race rather than the actual reason, poverty. For them, poverty is the direct result of the lazy poor themselves, living the good life in the inner cities...

“But to break the cycle of poverty, we must also break the cycle of violence.” - Trump

"...Violence does not cause poverty. Violence, is a symptom of poverty. To say otherwise perpetuates false information that has plagued policy in this country for decades and made it impossible to affect real change. When you muddy the relationship between the two, it contributes to a myth that has plagued the poor, especially poor black people, forever: That their situation is their fault.

If they weren’t so violent, maybe they wouldn’t be so poor. If people are violent, it’s usually because they are poor, because when you are poor, your opportunities to escape poverty are exceptionally limited..."

TurtleDude said:

how does that nonsense respond to what I said.
white on white crime is a far smaller per capita issue than black crime

that's the point

Click to expand...

Re-read my previous responses.

Sorry, but you don't get to ignore my questions and then expect that I answer yours.

Answer my original questions.

What are you so afraid of? Why don't you have anything to say about white on white crime rates, which are almost the same as black on black crime rates?

Answer the questions (my questions) which you've been avoiding. I've posted them at least twice previously. Give honest, direct answers, and you can ask me anything you wish.



"

ultmd said:

Yes. It's absolutely NOT "racist". You're proving my point. Again, you've got "racism" and "racist" confused with other things, which is a big part of the reason why those terms are so overused.

Click to expand...

This is ridiculous...


Both Merriam Webster and FreeDictionary.com define both words exactly the same.

That means the following statement is in fact a racist one, just as I said it was:

"Spoken like a typically clueless black person. This is why we (whites) don't trust you people."​

You are obviously doing exactly what I stated has been going on for some time now.... You are attempting to change the definition of racism/racist to something that better suits your ideological beliefs.

.

SoCal said:

It's widely accepted in conservative circles that the cause of crime is race rather than the actual reason, poverty. For them, poverty is the direct result of the lazy poor themselves, living the good life in the inner cities...

“But to break the cycle of poverty, we must also break the cycle of violence.” - Trump

"...Violence does not cause poverty. Violence, is a symptom of poverty. To say otherwise perpetuates false information that has plagued policy in this country for decades and made it impossible to affect real change. When you muddy the relationship between the two, it contributes to a myth that has plagued the poor, especially poor black people, forever: That their situation is their fault.

If they weren’t so violent, maybe they wouldn’t be so poor. If people are violent, it’s usually because they are poor, because when you are poor, your opportunities to escape poverty are exceptionally limited..."

Click to expand...

bolded claim-BS.

violence is a form of poverty? that sounds like something said in a sociology class :mrgreen:

ultmd said:

Re-read my previous responses.

Sorry, but you don't get to ignore my questions and then expect that I answer yours.

Answer my original questions.

What are you so afraid of? Why don't you have anything to say about white on white crime rates, which are almost the same as black on black crime rates?

Answer the questions (my questions) which you've been avoiding. I've posted them at least twice previously. Give honest, direct answers, and you can ask me anything you wish.



"

Click to expand...

I am not afraid of much-certainly not left-wingers on this board. the fact is racism is just as prevalent among lefties and minorities as it is among right wingers and whites

Conservatives like to make high school education to be simple, and American History classes are only two semesters long and Western Civilization classes are only two semesters long too. Since America is moving to be a majority minority population, Western Civilization does not have a counter part called Eastern Civilization to be within a high school education or a college education. Even that the Asian population is growing, we really do not teach that, or teach about India History too. We also do not teach history of Canada, Mexico, or Central America History as well.

If a college had American History, Western Civilization History, Eastern Civilization History, India History -- that would be 24 credit hours. If you add Canada, that will make it 30 credit hours.

TurtleDude said:

I am not afraid of much-certainly not left-wingers on this board. the fact is racism is just as prevalent among lefties and minorities as it is among right wingers and whites

Click to expand...

You say you're not afraid of much, yet you continue to run from my questions.

Ironic, huh?

So, either you really are afraid (and lying about your fear)....or you're just deflecting again in hopes that the subject will be changed.

Which is it?

Either way, I'm :lamo at you.

ultmd said:

You say you're not afraid of much, yet you continue to run from my questions.

Ironic, huh?

So, either you really are afraid (and lying about your fear)....or you're just deflecting again in hopes that the subject will be changed.

Which is it?

Either way, I'm :lamo at you.

Click to expand...

the feeling is mutual-what question are you seeking edification on?