It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
No, you didn't.
A minority of black property owners could vote, this was not common place. I've already said this in my post
the legality of white supremacy is not the topic of this thread.
White supremacy was never the law of the land, no one was separate but equal and the civil rights movement was just for kicks
[color=amber] NO, this wasn't even true when the Constitution was written.
When the Constitution was written, only white male property owners (about 10 to 16 percent of the nation's population) had the vote.
and the last state (of the original 13) to remove said requirements did so in 1856 ... not the early 1800s.
Over the past two centuries, though, the term "government by the people" has become a reality. During the early 1800s, states gradually dropped property requirements for voting.
the correct wording should read ...
Constitutional protections are meaningless when they are not being protected
those errors you can blame on the Attorneys of the day, the poor court systems and the perpetual failures of the USSC to interpret the Constitutional conflicts correctly.
No, I blame it on racist idiot judges, law makers, and the bigoted society of that time.
Originally posted by Trustfund
DIRECTIVE NO. 15
RACE AND ETHNIC STANDARDS FOR FEDERAL STATISTICS
AND ADMINISTRATIVE REPORTING
The basic racial and ethnic categories for Federal statistics and program administrative reporting are defined as follows:
American Indian or Alaskan Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North America, and who maintains cultural identification through tribal affiliations or community recognition.
Asian or Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, the Indian subcontinent, or the Pacific Islands. This area includes, for example, China, India, Japan, Korea, the Philippine Islands, and Samoa.
Black. A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa.
Hispanic. A person of Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, Central or South American or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race.
White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, North Africa, or the Middle East.
Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity
1. Categories and Definitions
The minimum categories for data on race and ethnicity for Federal statistics, program administrative reporting, and civil rights compliance reporting are defined as follows:
-- American Indian or Alaska Native. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of North and South America (including Central America), and who maintains tribal affiliation or community attachment.
-- Asian. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of the Far East, Southeast Asia, or the Indian subcontinent including, for example, Cambodia, China, India, Japan, Korea, Malaysia, Pakistan, the Philippine Islands, Thailand, and Vietnam.
-- Black or African American. A person having origins in any of the black racial groups of Africa. Terms such as "Haitian" or "Negro" can be used in addition to "Black or African American."
-- Hispanic or Latino. A person of Cuban, Mexican, Puerto Rican, Cuban, South or Central American, or other Spanish culture or origin, regardless of race. The term, "Spanish origin," can be used in addition to "Hispanic or Latino."
-- Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Hawaii, Guam, Samoa, or other Pacific Islands.
-- White. A person having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa.
Respondents shall be offered the option of selecting one or more racial designations. Recommended forms for the instruction accompanying the multiple response question are "Mark one or more" and "Select one or more."
Revisions to the Standards for the Classification of Federal Data on Race and Ethnicity
I'd say it is hypocritical to slam US values, and ignore that values in the rest of the world were far worse.
The DoI stated that all men were created equal, which doesn't include women. Women's rights came much later. And even then, the US was and is far ahead of the rest of the world.
While European countries did end slavery much earlier than the US, they remained monarchies with a strongly divided class system long after the US created the first democratic republic, and commoners in Europe had very little rights and in many ways were still treated like slaves.
The English Parliaments during the reign of King Henry III in the 13th century incorporated elected representation from shires and towns, and is considered the forerunner of the modern parliament
And you ignored the fact that Britain supported the slave owning confederacy during the civil war.
I am not sure how the western expansion of the US went against US ideals. How is spreading democracy against US ideals.
Native American tribes were very brutal towards competing tribes, and they fully embraced conquest.
Mexico attacked the US starting the Mexican American war, so why not take territories on which Mexico had no legitimate claim.
Sure, the people of the US embraced ideals they weren't capable of achieving, doesn't everyone? What is wrong with that? It is not hypocrisy.
Originally posted by TsukiLunar
What kind of person identifies with "white people" anyway? What kind of a grouping is that?
That's like asking what kind of person identifies with black people? Drug dealers? White people identify with white people.
Racism and stereotypes are a double edged sword.
Did anyone even come to think that by "white" being the "default" race, that in itself is racist behavior (both towards minorities and whites)?
oh please, school us pleebs, please ?
Originally posted by Staroth
reply to post by shelookslikeone
It's about groups. Not skin color. Your title is way off the mark. He left off many races if you want to look at it that way.
Funny how you want to point out this as something possibly racist on Obama's part against the white man, but aren't you being racist yourself with what your alluding to?
could this statement be any MORE hypocritical ??
meaning "All men are created equal" includes ALL HUMANS not just white men, the fact that they could not reconcile these ideas at the time makes them hypocrites
White Men as Full Diversity Partners
WMFDP is a leader in the essential work to reengage white men in successful diversity and inclusion initiatives inside companies.
[color=amber]Bill has pioneered white male only learning efforts along with innovative partnership work for senior leaders in corporations for the last 15 years.