It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Successful Black Prejudice

page: 1
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 11:13 AM
link   
Why is it that Successful Black's that support a Conservative or Republican agenda, routinely beleaguered by members of their own race as "sell outs", "Uncle Tom's" and even "Oreo's"?


On his radio show Thursday, John Sylvester of WTDY-AM in Madison called Rice an "Aunt Jemima" and said she isn't competent to be secretary of state. He said he used the term to describe Rice and other blacks as having only a subservient role in the Bush administration.
~~~~~~~~
Sylvester also referred to Powell as an "Uncle Tom."
www.10news.com...



Aunt Jemima Rice, Uncle Tom Powell?

By Earl Ofari Hutchinson, AlterNet. Posted November 23, 2004.

It's simply much easier, more fun and certainly more attention-getting to hack up Powell and Rice for allegedly selling out black interests.
www.alternet.org...



POSITION OF DANIEL R. VOVAK:
"It is important that the matter of Michael Steele's 'Oreo pelting' by unknown assailants be properly and thoroughly investigated by an impartial body."
www.vovak.politicalgateway.com...




It would appear that successful black's are routinely considered by their peers to have sold out or turned against whatever agenda is considered to be correct.
This even though those successful blacks struggled and obtained their education, fought a good fight and rose to the occasion, becoming what they desired to be. The American Dream.

Semper




posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 11:49 AM
link   


He said he used the term to describe Rice and other blacks as having only a subservient role in the Bush administration.


Well, the above is extremely telling, isn't it ? ' Having only a subservient role in the Bush administration'.

Compared to what .... having the ultimate role in a Rice administration ?

Then there's this:


This even though those successful blacks struggled and obtained their education, fought a good fight and rose to the occasion, becoming what they desired to be. The American Dream.


So successful blacks are to be criticised for achieving the American Dream?

Are they being criticised for not instead achieving the Black American Dream ?

But what IS the Black American Dream?

Do American Blacks know?

Is it the case that blacks would do better to acknowledge the date ... 2007?

Would they do better to acknowledge that the majority of blacks carry within them varying degrees of WHITE American blood, or Hispanic or Chinese or Latino or German or French etc. blood ?

Would they do better if they CEASED insisting on being a race or category apart ?

Would they do better (for themselves and their descendents) if they assimilated ALL the various strains of their individual heritage and accepted that first and foremost ....... they are AMERICAN !

After all, HOW BLACK is Condoleeza Rice ........ 20%, 15% ?

WHY THEN, must she be compelled to play the role of 'black' politician to the satisfaction of those whose skin is not exactly 'white' and who therefore CHOOSE to categorise themselves AND Rice as 'black' ?

Condoleeza Rice may NOT 'feel' black.

She may feel simply American.

She may not wish to be the poster-child of those who stubbornly cling to being 'black' rather than American.

Rice may have NEVER felt like a black woman. She may always have felt simply like Condoleeza Rice-ambitious American woman/politician.

The same applies to Colin Powell.

WHY would not Colin Powell identify MORE with his larger gene-pool, which obviously did not contain much 'black' DNA ?

If someone has a French father and American mother but has lived in Spain all his life, what is he? Very probably, he would identify himself as a Spaniard.

There is no such thing as 'black'. There is no such place as Blackland.

There are simply people who have varying degrees of pigmentation in their skin.

The average 'black' may have a quarter 'black' father who also has English, German and Polish ancestors.

WHY then, is that person not regarded as English, or German or Polish ?

That person may well BE regarded as English, etc. if not for HIS choosing to place himself in the 'black' category.

Most certainly, it is his right to choose to identify as 'black', BUT it gives him NO right to demand that Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice ALSO fit into his 'black' category. Nor does it give him the right to insist that Powell or Rice fulfill some ill-defined role of 'black' politician.

Rice and Powell have a slightly darker skin pigmentation than the average Scotsman, but that does NOT make Rice and Powell the PROPERTY of those who CHOOSE to belong to the actually non-existent 'black' group.

There are numerous Sicillians and Mexicans for example who have darker skin pigmentation than either Rice or Powell. Does that mean Sicillians and Mexicans ALSO have to fit the role of 'black' American ?

Blacks of whatever skin shade have been in the US for several hundred years now. Wouldn't it be a step forward if they were to accept themselves as simply 'American', the way Rice and Powell do ?



posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 12:13 PM
link   
I can never understand why they criticise blacks for being apart of the republican party. Any educated black person would know that it was the DEMOCRATS who supported slavery and fought a civil war to retain it. That "christian right" that constantly gets criticised for being "radicals" were the quakers, etc that were abolishionists. On the republican party's homepage they are rather proud of their abolishionist roots. The Dems homepage starts their history at the turn of the century, Gee I wonder why?
To this day the democrats enforce class descrimination and use freebie handouts to do it. They do not recognize the value of hard work and achievement.



posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 12:43 PM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
"sell outs", "Uncle Tom's" and even "Oreo's"?


... and neocons, don't forget 'neocons'. The minute that a black person, in a position of influence, says something that shines a light on something not pretty in the black community they are called 'neocon'. :shk:


Originally posted by Dock6
if they accepted that first and foremost ....... they are AMERICAN !


American. Not African-American. Not Irish-American. Not Italian-American. Just American. People would do better not to segregate themselves with these artificial titles.



posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 12:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by XphilesPhan
I can never understand why they criticise blacks for being apart of the republican party. Any educated black person would know that it was the DEMOCRATS who supported slavery and fought a civil war to retain it.

Of course, when it came to the modern civil rights struggle, the dixicrats amoung the democrats, who were violently opposed to civil rights, defected over to the republican party.



posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 01:11 PM
link   
Perhaps,

Yet every single Civil Rights movement has been either sponsored by Republicans or supported by them...

Where are the major players in ANY Democrat Administration?

Were there any equal to Secretary of State? Attorney General?

Why is it that FACTS are ignored and ASSUMPTIONS are accepted in this regard?

FACT

Secretary of State Rice. Black
Attorney General Gonzales. Hispanic
On and on...

Why is this not applauded instead of defamed and ridiculed?

Semper



posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 04:04 PM
link   
It's a good question, one I wonder about myself. But I also know I could never answer it. We white people can't answer it and shouldn't even try because we are sure to be way wrong.

Why is 50 cent still considered black even though he's very successful (have you seen his diamonds?), yet he himself called Oprah Winfrey an "Oreo" and a "Middle aged white woman" because her audience consists of women of all ages and races? And I have heard (but don't claim to know for sure) that Oprah isn't all that popular with black people. They don't like her because of her success, it would seem. Or maybe it's because she wears her diamonds on her neck and fingers instead of on her teeth.

It almost seems (from this black-ignorant white girl's perspective) that if you (as a black person) don't 'cater' to black Americans, you are going to be considered a sell-out. If you don't aim particularly at an exclusively black audience, you don't have the cred any more to bear the brand of 'black'. Of course, that's just the way it seems to me. I don't claim to know.

I wonder if Will and Jada Smith are still black... And if so, why? Why would they be any more black than Oprah?

It's like black isn't a race anymore, it's a culture or political stance. And Eminem is as 'black' as thy come. It's very confusing.

If I seem a little bitter, it's because I am. I just don't understand it all. I guess it's not for me to understand. But I'm a curious person.

[edit on 28-1-2007 by Benevolent Heretic]



posted on Jan, 28 2007 @ 05:26 PM
link   
It is becoming more and more clear that "Being Black" has little or nothing to do with Race...


HAMMER: On SHOWBIZ TONIGHT Oprah versus 50 Cent, stunning criticism of one of the most powerful women around. Why one of America`s biggest music stars, 50 Cent, says Oprah is so out of touch, she has essentially become a middle-aged white woman. Tonight the stars weigh in on the debate, Oprah versus 50.
transcripts.cnn.com...



I guess in the eyes of the Wisconsin newspaper, black people should know their place -- at the feet of liberals. Anyone who dares stand up to the paternalism of affirmative action forever will be hounded.
Hat tip to Brent Baker.
donsurber.blogspot.com...



A black man with pants baggy enough to fit four other people steps out of the car. His platinum teeth, chains and rings blind you as they glint in the sun. He straightens out the Saudi Arabian doo rag on his head that covers the maze of cornrows that his little sister just did the night before. You ain't black enough, he says simply. Black enough? I'm black. What does he mean by 'not black enough'?
www.geocities.com...


Semper



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 12:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by semperfortis
Why is this not applauded instead of defamed and ridiculed?


It's simple. Take two buddies growing up. They part and go separate ways.
One becomes successful and the other goes nowhere.
The guy that went nowhere calls his old friend "a yuppy, an ass-kisser, a man in a monkey suit, a corporate brown-noser." Claims he can't relate to his old freind anymore. The reality is, his friend had dreams and goals, wanted to make something of his life, while he didn't.
It's called jealousy, envy; either that or "misery loves company".



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 12:37 AM
link   
The sad part about this thread is that you all use such a question to evaluate the entire 12 per-cent of Black people in the country. How is it that no one can understand that Blacks are autonomous, cognitive human beings who have different perceptions and actions depending on their circumstances? Naturally not all Blacks think alike. Even within the "black community", there are different points of view.

White people are different--are they not? Do White people think alike?

For the most part, each Black person has their own opinion about their national leaders. There is no "party line" in the Black community--despite the disinformation that questions like this one seem to spread.

Take this to be an example:

In my opinion, I give a giant congratulations to all the people of color who have made it to the White House.

It is also a landmark that Dr. Rice has made it as far as she did.

However, it is her politics and ineptitude in her office that causes myself to cast a critical eye on her. Furthermore, she has not used her position to help others of all walks of life in the name of justice. She does, however, use policy to perpetuate the greed, corruption, bad foreign relations and actions of the present Administration.

(Notice that nowhere did I call her an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo")

In the same way, I am still critical of the actions of anyone that does injustice or harm to American policy, foreign relations and domestic issues. Race need not apply.

With that being said, other opinions in this thread fall on the old adage of a person of color being solely a "credit to their race" instead of scrutinizing their actions and behaviors. In other words, this is only the blind leading the blind.



[edit on 29-1-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by ceci2006
However, it is her politics and ineptitude in her office that causes myself to cast a critical eye on her. Furthermore, she has not used her position to help others of all walks of life in the name of justice. She does, however, use policy to perpetuate the greed, corruption, bad foreign policy and actions of the present Administration.

LOL! Ceci, she's not any different than anyone else in Washington.

We all know about corruption in politics. The fact that she made it to where she is, is a great success story and makes her a good role model for any little black girl dreaming of getting into politics one day.... and that means doing good in school, graduating, moving up in the world. Despite whatever shortcomings in her job (and we all have them) she's a great role model for young black girls striving to make something of themselves.


Originally posted by ceci2006
With that being said, other opinions in this thread fall on the old adage of a person of color being a "credit to their race" instead of scrutinizing their actions in office. In other words, this is only the blind leading the blind.

Scrutinizing is "judging". You're not there with her on a daily basis to know everything about her. You don't walk in her shoes.
She's black and she's in the White House. She's a positive role model for any young kid.



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:27 AM
link   

Originally quoted by rocknroll

We all know about corruption in politics. The fact that she made it to where she is, is a great success story and makes her a good role model for any little black girl dreaming of getting into politics one day.... and that means doing good in school, graduating, moving up in the world. Despite whatever shortcomings in her job (and we all have them) she's a great role model for young black girls striving to make something of themselves.


No one is discounting that. However, young black girls also have to learn how to take in not only personal history, but actions in political offices as well. And that is a more important lesson to learn than simple idolatry.




Scrutinizing is "judging".


Yes, you're correct. If you vote, you are "scrutinizing" the candidates to pick the right one for office. You just don't want any Tom, Dick, or Harry there, do you?


You're not there with her on a daily basis to know everything about her. You don't walk in her shoes.


Neither do you....unless you can read her mind.


She's black and she's in the White House.


But is that all? Can she not be critically analyzed like anyone else in Washington? What ever happened to critical thinking?


She's a positive role model for any young kid.


Until you dig into her connections and holdings. A kid would flee once he or she finds out what Dr. Rice has gotten her hands dirty over.

However, I am more interested in someone answering whether they truly adopt the notion that all Black folk think alike and why they think so. That would get to the crux of the matter right away.


[edit on 29-1-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:40 AM
link   

original quote by Ceci2006: But is that all? Can she not be critically analyzed like anyone else in Washington?


Do you call name calling and images as the one posted "Critical Analysis"?

Do the terms "Oreo and Uncle Tom" equate to "Critical Thinking?

Also your comparison to "Whites" in office holds no water unless you can show me proof where ANY white person has EVER called another white person a racially derogatory name as it relates to their success...

Yet the opposite examples are far to numerous to list.


Semper



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:45 AM
link   
Why do you care? How does someone being called an "Uncle Tom" or an "Oreo" affect your life?

[edit on 29-1-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:46 AM
link   
UHHHH

I care because that is what the thread is about????

Semper

[edit on 1/29/2007 by semperfortis]

[edit on 1/29/2007 by semperfortis]
and again

[edit on 1/29/2007 by semperfortis]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:48 AM
link   
You must have some invested interest in the terms "Uncle Tom" or "Oreo". Otherwise, why even bother?



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:53 AM
link   
No,

I have a Humanistic vested interest in successful people and the continuation of the species in regards to intellectual pursuits...


The issue is as stated in the opening post...

Is your only concern on the subject, or reply, to wonder why I am interested?

Is it not enough of an issue that these intelligent successful people are deserving of more respect than this? Or is it simply your concern that I am concerned?

Semper



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 01:57 AM
link   
I am very glad for your humanistic approach to this subject. I'm all for intelligent people being successful.

Otherwise I answered you, if you looked at my first post in this thread. I critically analyzed Dr. Rice and praised her success. I did not use name-calling to do so.

And if that is the case, you have my answer.


[edit on 29-1-2007 by ceci2006]



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 05:20 AM
link   
So then, you do consider name calling as critical thinking....

I would never have expected that... Strange

Oh well

Semper



posted on Jan, 29 2007 @ 05:37 AM
link   

Originally quoted by semperfortis

So then, you do consider name calling as critical thinking...



How did you arrive at that conclusion?

Well, I guess it's up to you to prove it.

If not, it would be best to add something else to discuss in this thread in order for it move on.



[edit on 29-1-2007 by ceci2006]



new topics

top topics



 
2
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join