Who do you blame for the problems of African Americans?? [W:98]

What an educational thread.

Gathomas88 said:

This plays into a great many other issues, such as not being able to send one's children to the best schools, not being able to provide the best quality medical care, not being able to afford to live in neighborhoods which might provide one's children the most positive environment for future success, not being able to spend the necessary amount of time raising, disciplining, motivating, and supervising one's children required to keep them out trouble, and etca.

When one is talking about a group which tends to be somewhat disadvantaged to begin with, the damage this can cause is basically fatal to the goal of upward social mobility and material achievement.

Click to expand...

No. However, they are, by and large, certainly incapable of providing the same kind of financial stability and quantity of care that a two parent household tends to be.

Click to expand...

Are they incapable? Really? You deduce that they are incapable based on outcome without looking into WHY? Incapable and unable are very different aren't they?

Racism is irrelevant?

Click to expand...

your response was a tit-for-tat

Gathomas88 said:

Did you not argue in a recent thread that modern young people were actually much better behaved on average than past generations?

What then, would you argue they have done which makes them in any way "responsible" for their current predicament?

Click to expand...

You sound confused. I'm not the one who has argued that anyone's lack of success is entirely their own fault

That would be you.

To the contrary, culture and media play major roles. Black culture and media are worse than most, as a matter of fact.

Click to expand...

For one thing, I did not know that media companies, like TV networks and magazines, had a race.

For another thing, you are contradicting yourself when you claim that people are responsible for their own lack of success, but then say that culture and the media have an effect. You're trying to have it all ways at one. Try some straight talk for once

If you had been paying attention at all, you would realize that this very culture is actually the primary thing about "Black America" that I have been arguing needs to change if African Americans are to get ahead.

However, culture can ultimately only influence behavior, not dictate it. Anyone who wishes to rise above it, can.

Click to expand...

You speak about black culture and black america as if they were things entirely separate from white culture and white america, which they are not. This may surprise you, but more white people "consume" the products that black culture produces (music, clothes, etc) than black people do.

Gipper said:

Just the names would suffice. I've researched academic journals plenty. I'd love to look up some information. Thanks.

Click to expand...

Cool. Two articles are "Jim Crow's Drug War: Race, Coca Cola, and the Southern Origins of Drug Prohibition" by Michael M. Cohen. It was in the Southern Cultures journal, specifically volume 12, issue 3 and premiered in the fall of 2006. The other is "Opium smoking, anti‐Chinese attitudes, and the American medical community, 1850–1890" by Diana L. Ahamad in the American Nineteenth Century History journal, volume 1 issue to and premiered in the fall of 2000.

The majority of African Americans do not "have problems." By problems I mean what this thread is obvious referring to - incarceration, violence, poverty, drugs. Well, I've said this a million times, but I'll say it again. It isn't about black vs. white. It's about poor vs. rich. The same problems with violence and poverty and drugs are equally prevalent among poor white communities. And weirdly enough, a poor white guy living in the ghetto next to a poor black guy will probably make friends with that black guy. Because what you look like is much less important than where you come from.

The narrative in the black community is much different than what conservative America believes it to be. Black leaders talk all the time about welfare dependence, black on black violence, gangs and drugs ripping their communities apart. Yes, they believe that they are victims of having come from generations of black Americans who were first enslaved and then ostracized and excluded. They have a good point there. But I'd like those of you saying that black people keep "blaming whitey" to go to the ghetto and see what's really going on. Talk to the people there. They do blame white people, I don't deny that. But they feel empowered to overcome what they see as a very unfair country that favors white people.

Watch this: Louis Theroux, Black Nationalism
It's extremely entertaining. Louis is the best reporter of all time IMHO. The "Black Nationalists" don't come off so well, but this documentary? This shows what's REAL. Not the fake media BS we're fed every day.

RedAkston said:

I'm at work so I'll respond in detail later but no one is losing control of their emotions and I was simply pointing out the hypocrisy of those who share the same beliefs that you do.

Click to expand...

Uh... What hypocrisy? What, the fact that we know what century we're in? I'm missing it, here.

opendebate said:

Are they incapable? Really? You deduce that they are incapable based on outcome without looking into WHY? Incapable and unable are very different aren't they.

Click to expand...

What do you mean, "why?"

The answer is obvious. A single mother simply has double the workload of a traditional parent, with half the available resources at her disposal to accomplish the task.

She can't fully devote herself to either a career or education, as she would risk neglecting her children in doing so. She also cannot fully devote herself to her children, because it would risk running the entire family into the poor house. For that exact reason, what most single parent families wind up with is a sorry compromise between the two, where a great many single mothers wind up poor, and a great many of their children wind up neglected, either way regardless, simply because it isn't feasible for the head of the household see to everyone's needs effectively.

It's simply a bad model. It overwhelmingly results in poor outcomes, for both mothers and children alike, as such.

Frankly, even for those women who do manage to make it work, it is still a far harder life than it has to be.

sangha said:

You sound confused. I'm not the one who has argued that anyone's lack of success is entirely their own fault

That would be you.

Click to expand...

To the contrary, you are confused. I never argued any such thing.

A lack of personal success can be attributed to any number of factors, which may or may not be fault of the individual, or individuals, involved.

Again, all I have argued here is that many members of the Black Community can be seen to regularly engage in a large number of counter-productive and blatantly destructive behaviors which impede any form of social advancement to which they may happen to aspire. No one is to "blame" for that fact, besides the people who indulge in such behaviors, and the attitudes which make them acceptable, in the first place.

Until this reality changes, it is unlikely that the Black Community will move forward.

For one thing, I did not know that media companies, like TV networks and magazines, had a race.

For another thing, you are contradicting yourself when you claim that people are responsible for their own lack of success, but then say that culture and the media have an effect. You're trying to have it all ways at one. Try some straight talk for once

Click to expand...

Media companies tailor their messages and products to what sells.

What sells, is largely dependent upon popular culture.

In turn, popular culture is further influenced by the messages with which it is bombarded in the form of mass media.

It is, in essence, a positive feedback loop, with behavior influencing attitudes, and attitudes influencing behavior. Where African American culture, and the mass media responsible for selling it, are concerned, it simply happens to be the case that the messages it is responsible for selling, and therefore the behaviors it is responsible for encouraging, are overwhelmingly negative.

I fail to see why this is a hard concept to grasp.

You speak about black culture and black america as if they were things entirely separate from white culture and white america, which they are not. This may surprise you, but more white people "consume" the products that black culture produces (music, clothes, etc) than black people do.

Click to expand...

First off, source?

Secondly, I spoke about the black and white communities as if they were separate cultures because they are separate cultures. Hell! Truth be told, the Sunnis, Shia, and Kurds butchering one another in Iraq at the present moment probably have more in common with one another than the inner city blacks and suburban whites we are currently discussing.

They have their own music, they have their own history, they have their own values, and in some regards, they very nearly have their own languages and religions as well. Even beyond that, the simple fact of the matter is that many lower class blacks make a deliberate point of trying to keep their "culture" separate from the culture of the mainstream United States.

They do this by discouraging members of their communities from engaging in any endeavor or behavior which they might perceive as being overly "white."

It simply happens to be the case that many of the things they discourage include pursuits like marriage, education, the willingness to work, and respect for civil and legal authority. A great many African Americans struggle to adapt and thrive in our society as such.

Gathomas88 said:

To the contrary, you are confused. I never argued any such thing.

Click to expand...

No, you never said anything like that!

Gathomas88 said:

Modern African Americans are not "victims." Frankly, the fact that so many of them insist on thinking of themselves as such is a major part of the problem where their advancement in American society is concerned.

I hate to break it to everyone, but the simple fact of the matter is that "success" isn't the kind of thing that is arbitrarily bestowed upon a person, or a people, by someone else. It is something that they have to reach out, take for themselves, and throttle into submission.

The "bleeding hearts" can bitch all they want. Nothing will change where the black community's situation is concerned until they make the decision to make it happen for themselves.

Click to expand...

sangha said:

No, you never said anything like that!

Gathomas88 said:

Modern African Americans are not "victims." Frankly, the fact that so many of them insist on thinking of themselves as such is a major part of the problem where their advancement in American society is concerned.

I hate to break it to everyone, but the simple fact of the matter is that "success" isn't the kind of thing that is arbitrarily bestowed upon a person, or a people, by someone else. It is something that they have to reach out, take for themselves, and throttle into submission.

The "bleeding hearts" can bitch all they want. Nothing will change where the black community's situation is concerned until they make the decision to make it happen for themselves.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

I have said nothing to contradict that point. :shrug:

Gathomas88 said:

I have said nothing to contradict that point. :shrug:

Click to expand...

Aside from saying that you didn't say it, you've said nothing that contradicts it

sangha said:

Aside from saying that you didn't say it, you've said nothing that contradicts it

Click to expand...

I never claimed that "anyone's lack of success is entirely their own fault" in the first place, let alone that it was any kind of universal principle.

Gathomas88 said:

I never claimed that "anyone's lack of success is entirely their own fault" in the first place, let alone that it was any kind of universal principle.

Click to expand...

You said that success is something that people reach out and take. Therefore, if someone is not successful, it is because they did not reach out and take it.

whose fault is it that they didn't reach out and take it? Someone elses?

Gathomas88 said:

they make the decision to make it happen for themselves.

Click to expand...

sangha said:

You said that success is something that people reach out and take. Therefore, if someone is not successful, it is because they did not reach out and take it.

whose fault is it that they didn't reach out and take it? Someone elses?

Click to expand...

If a person stops trying to be successful, then that is certainly their fault. To a certain extent, that's exactly what I think large portions of the modern black community are guilty of doing.

They take poverty and social degradation as being not only foregone conclusions, but trappings of their "culture," so they do not even attempt to break the the mold which put them in that state of being in the first place.

I never said that a person could not have certain things working against them in their attempt to rise above their circumstances. To the contrary, they might have several such factors working against their ambitions.

It is simply their duty to overcome such difficulties as they arise. "Success" demands nothing less.

Gathomas88 said:

If a person stops trying to be successful, then that is certainly their fault. To a certain extent, that's exactly what I think large portions of the modern black community are guilty of doing.

Click to expand...

To a certain extent, I think your beliefs about black people are delusional

Gathomas88 said:

Again, as an Irish American, I am a "victim" (by proxy, same as you) of much the same. Do you see me complaining?

Click to expand...

By proxy of whom? The British? Pretty sure the Irish got their own country and piggybacking on the riches of the United Kingdom as a reconciliation prize. But that is beside the point.

You were never enslaved. You were never faced with segregation.As a matter of fact, roughly half of the country's blacks were never faced with segregation even when it was in effect.

Click to expand...

So how does that work? Do only half of the people in this country get excused for not having accomplished anything? Or do the other half get 3/5ths of an excuse because they were apparently orphaned away and didn't have to deal with the segregation and oppression? Lol.

Because we made it happen.

Click to expand...

We? You didn't make anything happen in the same way that I was never oppressed. If your logic is to reason it's all within the individual. Or did the Irish suddenly stop being oppressed as a group of people to the point where the cultural and social oppression of the past was no longer an issue? Think about your answer very carefully now.

They are already rising to overcome it, while African Americans continue to languish in poverty, and even backslide.

Click to expand...

Only that isn't true and you know it. There are more college educated black people today than ever in the history of this country. More blacks with HS diplomas than ever before. More black millionaires than ever before, more black CEOs than ever before. So yes, your argument doesn't really hold that much water. I'm just stating all of this before you go into the nonsense of the "BEFORE'EM BLACKS GOT THE CRA'64 PASSED!" argument.

I'm sorry man, but if there's a problem here, it's not "the system." It's African Americans.

A) Blacks only "built" the South.

B) Every new immigrant group to enter the United States has had to sacrifice its original culture. That is, quite frankly, what "America" is all about.

C) Plenty of other groups have faced that discrimination, and overcome it.

The excuses will only carry you so far, I'm afraid.

Click to expand...

Your argument has watered down from confidence in the claim that only blacks themselves are to blame for their problems to skating on the premise that only half of blacks are to blame for their problems. As if poverty worked in vacuums where from one generation to the next all past oppressions went away. Only it didn't in the case of African-Americans. New forms of oppression were created. Hell, the Irish in America had to essentially leave Ireland and come to a land they'd settled for 100 years and would face little to no oppression so that they'd have a chance at making it.

The point is...

Leaving poverty doesn't work the way you think it works. It is a slow process which takes quite a few generations and social policy changes to overcome. The Irish who left Ireland got a break from British oppression for nearly 150 years. That's what allowed them to "become" something better. The Irish who stayed in Ireland didn't really come out of poverty until what? 20 years ago? If it hadn't been for the mismanagement of housing prices, it may still have been growing for all we know. However, what is certain is that the Irish economy suffered under the oppressive hand of the British to the point that it wasn't until the year 2000 that they managed to recover some sense of economic independence. Who is to blame for this? The Irish? Of course not. The oppression of the British? Sure. What the Irish had that blacks haven't until recently were representatives in all domains.

sangha said:

To a certain extent, I think your beliefs about black people are delusional

Click to expand...

The statistics, their abyssal track record vis-a-vis every other minority group in the United States, and the state of contemporary black popular culture would all seem to indicate otherwise.

What "problems"?

Hatuey said:

By proxy of whom?

Click to expand...

Our ancestors, obviously. You are no more a "victim" of slavery or segregation than I am a victim of the potato famine or "Irish Need Not Apply" signs.

Claiming otherwise is simply delusional.

So how does that work? Do only half of the people in this country get excused for not having accomplished anything? Or do the other half get 3/5ths of an excuse because they were apparently orphaned away and didn't have to deal with the segregation and oppression? Lol.

Click to expand...

No one gets excused, because it was in the past, and therefore completely irrelevant to anything taking place today.

I was simply pointing out that the extent of the discrimination against African Americans was no where near as complete as you were making it out to be. In the North and the West, anti-Irish and anti-black discrimination were probably on about equal terms.

Or did the Irish suddenly stop being oppressed as a group of people to the point where the cultural and social oppression of the past was no longer an issue? Think about your answer very carefully now.

Click to expand...

Yup, because we established ourselves as a force to be reckoned with, while simultaneously integrating ourselves into the existing culture. It's the same way the Jews and any number of other, "discriminated against," and reviled groups have managed to make it big in American culture.

Again, the black community was well on its way towards the same in many parts of the country prior to the 1970s.

Only that isn't true and you know it. There are more college educated black people today than ever in the history of this country. More blacks with HS diplomas than ever before. More black millionaires than ever before, more black CEOs than ever before. So yes, your argument doesn't really hold that much water. I'm just stating all of this before you go into the nonsense of the "BEFORE'EM BLACKS GOT THE CRA'64 PASSED!" argument.

Click to expand...

Don't forget. You've also got a man in the White House.

In any case, "good on them," I say. They are living proof that it is not in any sense "impossible" for African Americans to succeed in modern American society.

If their lower class brethren would actually take note of this fact, and emulate their examples more frequently (as many successful African Americans have themselves suggested), instead of making heroes out of lowlife rappers and thugs, while denouncing more traditionally "successful" men and women as being white-washed "sellouts," the black community as a whole might very well be able to advance itself.

Leaving poverty doesn't work the way you think it works. It is a slow process which takes quite a few generations and social policy changes to overcome.

Click to expand...

It has worked the way I described for literally every other minority group in the United States besides African Americans. They struggle for a while, each generation making it higher than the next, and then they finally make it to the Middle Class, and it is smooth sailing from there on out.

African Americans were on that path for most of the Twentieth Century. However, in the last few decades, their success has stagnated, and even begun to backslide in many regards.

The sad truth of the matter is that this state of affairs is largely due to certain counter-productive political ideas and social practices which have taken root in "Black Culture" in the last half-century. Excessive government dependency and the erosion of the family unit brought about welfare plays a major role, as does the idea of perpetual African American "victimhood" preached by political pundits and ideologues attempting to use the African American community to their own ends.

No one is denying that the African American community has historically had a rough time of things. However, that is all in the past now. Where they go from here is entirely up to them. They have all the tools at their disposal they would ever need to overcome the injustices of the past.

If they choose to not make use of them, then they really have no one to blame but themselves.

ttwtt78640 said:

Statistically that is not so. To assert that race has no bearing on many social (cultural?) trends within the US is dishonest. What other group voted 90% for Obama?

Click to expand...

So what are you saying?

Gathomas88 said:

Our ancestors, obviously. You are no more a "victim" of slavery or segregation than I am a victim of the potato famine or "Irish Need Not Apply" signs.

Claiming otherwise is simply delusional.

Click to expand...

I'm glad you basically ignored the question I asked you so you could repeat the same catch phrases over and over again. However, here it is again it's not going away:

Did the Irish suddenly stop being oppressed as a group of people to the point where the cultural and social oppression of the past was no longer an issue?

Click to expand...

The fact is that they stopped being oppressed and the cultural and social oppression of the past is still an issue for most Irish. The fact that Ireland only managed to become any kind of economic power in the 1990s is proof enough. In a continent where nations like Portugal, Holland and Switzerland have all taken their shots at being economic powers, the Irish only managed to do it in the 1990s. Why is that? It could be the fact that they were oppressed by England until up to the 1960s. Go figure! And they had a country all to themselves!

In contrast: The Irish in America? Thriving thanks to the fact that they were first class citizens. Hell, the Irish had become full Americans by the 1930s thanks to the fact that they were white. All of which reinforces the white privilege argument. The Polish, the Germans, the Swiss all were fully integrated into American society (remember: a culture doesn't integrate itself, it has to be integrated) by the time the 1960s rolled around. Blacks were completely rejected by the same society. And this was DURING the supposed period in the 1920s (The Harlem Renaissance) where race relations mended.

No one gets excused, because it was in the past, and therefore completely irrelevant to anything taking place today.

Click to expand...

Ah, so people who were oppressed and are still alive, don't get an excuse for not becoming as successful as those who've had centuries to amass wealth? LOL. You're the type that blames the rape victim aren't ya?

I was simply pointing out that the extent of the discrimination against African Americans was no where near as complete as you were making it out to be. In the North and the West, anti-Irish and anti-black discrimination were probably on about equal terms.

Click to expand...

Only they weren't. Whereas Irish were able to own property and amass wealth countrywide (thanks to Jim Crowe laws, urbanization laws etc), this was denied to blacks countrywide. This is a fact.

Again, the black community was well on its way towards the same in many parts of the country prior to the 1970s.

Click to expand...

WHERE? In Harlem? In one neighborhood? In the 1920s? You're simply being disingenuous now. For the most part, black poverty was levels above what it is today. Your claim that black people were coming up in America before the the 1960s just isn't founded on any kind of data but historical revisionism. Hell, for your argument to hold water, poverty in the US would have had to gone up in the last few years instead of down 65%! The fact of the matter is that entering poverty and coming out of poverty works in generational terms. For large groups it doesn't happen over 10 years, it doesn't even happen over 20 years. It takes decades of economic development as well as economic favoritism for it to happen. The same kind of economic development that benefited the Irish must happen for African Americans, only it's not because of the pull yourselves up by the bootstrap mentality. Essentially, it works this way:

1. America got rich off black backs and their cheap labor.
2. Blacks ask for a hand in economic terms.
3. America now tells blacks to get rich on their own.

Cephus said:

And whose fault is that? The poor white community doesn't punish whites for trying to get out of the ghetto. The poor Hispanic community doesn't call Hispanics who try to better themselves "Uncle Tomas". It's only the black community who turns on their own for trying to be successful.

Click to expand...

White people call other white people who don't identify with the conservative ideology, or who voted for Obama a "self loathing white".

Truth be told, I see conservatives tossing around the "white guilt" label more than I see blacks calling other blacks uncle toms.

Hatuey said:

I'm glad you basically ignored the question I asked you so you could repeat the same catch phrases over and over again. However, here it is again it's not going away:

The fact is that they stopped being oppressed and the cultural and social oppression of the past is still an issue for most Irish. How was 1960s Ireland after the British got done with it? It was in shambles. The Irish in America? Thriving thanks to the fact that they were first class citizens. Hell, the Irish had almost become full Americans by the 1930s thanks to the fact that they were white. All of which reinforces the white privilege argument. The Polish, the Germans, the Swiss all were fully integrated into American society (remember: a culture doesn't integrate itself, it has to be integrated) by the time the 1960s rolled around. Blacks were completely rejected by the same society. And this was DURING the supposed period in the 1920s where race relations mended.

Click to expand...

A) We're not talking about mainland Ireland. Just drop that outright.

B) No, the Irish most certainly were not simply treated as "first class" citizens the moment they got off the boat, nor was any other Catholic (or even non-Protestant) immigrant group. To the contrary, we were rather heavily discriminated against, and even lynched right alongside blacks in some parts of the country.

Mass racial violence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia






C) "Whiteness" as a generalized concept is a thoroughly American concept. It came about specifically because Caucasian Europeans from so many different backgrounds put aside their original heritages and languages, assimilated into mainstream American culture, and interbred with peoples of different countries of origin after landing on American shores. It wasn't something implemented by design, and was actually actively resisted in many cases.

The simple fact of the matter here remains that there are plenty of groups in this country who have faced historical discrimination and adversity just as bad as African Americans, and managed to thrive in spite of it. Black America is not some precious little unique flower here.

I will grant you that the Black Community's situation was complicated somewhat by the institutionalized divide enforced by Segregation. However, that would have only affected a few states in the first place, and has been gone for more than 50 years now.

It is no longer a valid excuse for the such a large portion of the African American population's failure to thrive.

Ah, so people who were oppressed and are still alive, don't get an excuse for not becoming as successful as those who've had centuries to amass wealth? LOL. You're the type that blames the rape victim aren't ya?

Click to expand...

This doesn't even make sense.

Only they weren't. Whereas Irish were able to own property and amass wealth countrywide (thanks to Jim Crowe laws, urbanization laws etc), this was denied to blacks countrywide. This is a fact.

Click to expand...

And how many states actually straight out forbade blacks from owning property? :roll:

You are also aware that Jim Crow Laws weren't only targeted against Blacks, correct? In many parts of the country (California, for instance) they were actually most heavily slanted against Chinese immigrants, or Latinos.

How are Chinese Americans doing these days? Do you see them whining, or rattling on about any sort of historical "victimhood?"

WHERE? In Harlem? In one neighborhood? In the 1920s? You're simply being disingenuous now. For the most part, black poverty was levels above what it is today. Your claim that black people were coming up in America before the the 1960s just isn't founded on any kind of data but historical revisionism.

Click to expand...

I'm just going to leave these here.



See that precipitous decline prior to 1970? That was the most economic and social progress the Black Community had ever seen in its entire history.

Since then, African Americans have basically stagnated, and kept pace with Latinos where poverty rates are concerned (in spite of many Latinos being penniless immigrants fresh off the boat where African Americans have been here for centuries). However, even that is misleading, as Latinos actually have higher median incomes than Blacks, and Asians blow basically everyone out of the water.

Hell, for your argument to hold water, poverty in the US would have had to gone up by 10% in the last few years instead of down 65%! The fact of the matter is that entering poverty and coming out of poverty works in generational terms. For large groups it doesn't happen over 10 years, it doesn't even happen over 20 years. It takes decades of economic development as well as economic favoritism for it to happen. The same kind of economic development that benefited the Irish must happen for African Americans, only it's not because of the pull yourselves up by the bootstrap mentality. Essentially, it works this way:

1. America got rich off black backs and their cheap labor.
2. Blacks ask for a hand in economic terms.
3. America now tells blacks to get rich on their own.

Click to expand...

I'm sorry, but this is simply complete and total nonsense. No one gave prior immigrants "a hand" in economic terms. They worked for their current status, just as Asian Americans and many Latinos are doing now.

You're essentially asking the Black Community to bank on something that never has existed, never will exist, and couldn't possibly exist even if some mad man was dumb enough to try it, to solve all of its collective problems, rather than asking them to simply work their way up on their own.

The unfortunate reality of the situation here is that as long as that kind of "entitlement" centric thinking remains in vogue, African Americans will stay exactly where they are, while everyone else passes them by.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

Well, first of all, no, I'm not "upset." Some of us are capable of looking at problems without losing control of our emotions. Foreign, I know.

Click to expand...

I haven't lost control of my emotions in the slightest.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

Planned Parenthood is subject to a lot of the same bureaucratic problems that any other large organization is, but apart from that, they're pretty straight.

Click to expand...

OK, but that has nothing to do with the origins of PP.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

If you're referring to some of Sanger's questionable beliefs, first of all, she's been dead for an awfully long time and we've all moved on. Second, she really wasn't any worse than her surrounding culture. If you want to use that argument, I could just as easily say we should overthrow the Constitution because the founders didn't believe in rights for the poor, women, or black people. It's equally ridiculous. We simply updated the document, like PP updated as well.

Click to expand...

Her beliefs were not "questionable", they were downright racist and abhorrent. To call them "questionable" is the understatement of the year. She was a proponent of eugenics and sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit" - the "unfit"! You can say that her "surrounding culture" wanted wanted to eliminate the unfit, but that doesn't make it right - then or now.

And your analogy of overthrowing the Constitution is an odd one and one that doesn't make any sense. The writers of the Constitution created the greatest country on earth. Margaret Sanger sought to "eliminate the unfit". There is a huge difference as nothing in the Constitution, as originally written, that sought to hold anyone back. The definition of the word "person" may have held a different meaning to many back then, but again it wasn't right then and it isn't right now. My point is that PP was rooted in racism during it's creation and it's held up high on a pedestal among liberals and progressives. Drug laws were written to target drug users. To attach "racism" to drug laws is quite a stretch.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

Myself and other pro-choicers don't support Sanger's fashionable social Darwinism by supporting the modern PP any more than an American patriot supports slavery and reducing women to legal children by going into the military. The fact that you folks have to resort to something so absurd says a lot about what shaky ground you really stand on.

Click to expand...

"Us folks" aren't resorting to anything and we aren't on "shaky ground". We aren't the hypocrites that "you folks" are.

SmokeAndMirrors said:

And the fact that you have to change the subject entirely to save some face shows that you're on even shakier ground on this particular issue (which is race in America, remember?).

Click to expand...

I didn't change the subject at all. You showed your hypocrisy quite clearly, just as I knew you would.

RedAkston said:

I haven't lost control of my emotions in the slightest.

OK, but that has nothing to do with the origins of PP.

Her beliefs were not "questionable", they were downright racist and abhorrent. To call them "questionable" is the understatement of the year. She was a proponent of eugenics and sought to "assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit" - the "unfit"! You can say that her "surrounding culture" wanted wanted to eliminate the unfit, but that doesn't make it right - then or now.

And your analogy of overthrowing the Constitution is an odd one and one that doesn't make any sense. The writers of the Constitution created the greatest country on earth. Margaret Sanger sought to "eliminate the unfit". There is a huge difference as nothing in the Constitution, as originally written, that sought to hold anyone back. The definition of the word "person" may have held a different meaning to many back then, but again it wasn't right then and it isn't right now. My point is that PP was rooted in racism during it's creation and it's held up high on a pedestal among liberals and progressives. Drug laws were written to target drug users. To attach "racism" to drug laws is quite a stretch.

"Us folks" aren't resorting to anything and we aren't on "shaky ground". We aren't the hypocrites that "you folks" are.

I didn't change the subject at all. You showed your hypocrisy quite clearly, just as I knew you would.

Click to expand...

I didn't say it makes it right. And my Constitution analogy is precisely on point; you are arguing that modern PP is evil on the basis of the cultural evils of a previous century. Well, I would say the cultural evils in the era of the Constitution were even worse, and far more wide-reaching. So does that make the modern Constitution evil?

I notice you did nothing at all to address any of my points.

Sanger did not create PP to eliminate black people, dude. She was a racist social Darwinist, as the majority of white people were at the time, but she was serving white women in abundance. That's like arguing -- to keep with the same analogy -- that the only point of the Constitution was to perpetuate slavery. That's absurd.

Sanger is dead, dude. People who support PP do not "support Sanger." People who support the Constitution do not support slavery and the degradation of the poor and women.

And as someone linked to up-thread, the racist roots of the modern drug war are clearly on display, and weren't even particularly secret at the time. You can deny it all you like, but it's right there.

You didn't change the topic? You went from racial issues to reproductive health care. And what's hilarious is that you lost that diversion as much as you lost on the original topic. :lol:

SmokeAndMirrors said:

I didn't say it makes it right. And my Constitution analogy is precisely on point; you are arguing that modern PP is evil on the basis of the cultural evils of a previous century. Well, I would say the cultural evils in the era of the Constitution were even worse, and far more wide-reaching. So does that make the modern Constitution evil?

I notice you did nothing at all to address any of my points.

Sanger did not create PP to eliminate black people, dude. She was a racist social Darwinist, as the majority of white people were at the time, but she was serving white women in abundance. That's like arguing -- to keep with the same analogy -- that the only point of the Constitution was to perpetuate slavery. That's absurd.

Sanger is dead, dude. People who support PP do not "support Sanger." People who support the Constitution do not support slavery and the degradation of the poor and women.

And as someone linked to up-thread, the racist roots of the modern drug war are clearly on display, and weren't even particularly secret at the time. You can deny it all you like, but it's right there.

You didn't change the topic? You went from racial issues to reproductive health care. And what's hilarious is that you lost that diversion as much as you lost on the original topic. :lol:

Click to expand...

Blah, blah, blah...

Actually, I went from drug laws (which the enforcement of may be racially motivated, but their creation being racist is BS - sorry) to PP which is rooted in racist issues from the beginning, do try to keep up. It exposed the hypocrisy and if you can't see that, well, you can't see that. :shrug: