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.

 

Daring to be Different in the Black Community

page: 47
182
<< 44  45  46    48 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 01:52 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


The short answer is yes. I have a close friend that is a social worker. He says similar things a lot of the time. When I pressed him on the fact that a higher percentage of the African American population was in the top socio-economic tiers prior to the "great society" initiatives. He started talking about the dissapearance of union jobs and international corporations. He completely ignored the fact that higher numbers of AAs where employeed and in the upper tiers of income owners before so called "support programs."

I have heard a psychologist call it a "race wide case of PTSD that can not be recovered from in an ordinary manner." In Washington state they have classes encouraging kids to consider how their "white privilige" holds back minorities. They even teach things like, "maintaining a rigid schedule is a culturual construct." IF you don't agree you're simply labeled insensitive or a racist and ridiculed.




posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 02:31 PM
link   
reply to post by MikeNice81
 


Wow....and yes, I have heard of such classes being taught about white privilege.

Its hard to reason with that friend of mine. I literally am baffled in the way she thinks, but then a social worker's career is based on people believing that they can't help themselves and therefore programs must be started. Each time we talk, she is always speaking about how she is going to write her next paper or do her main thesis on some new 'program' for blacks.


Whenever I start to speak on this issue, I explain that instead of asking for more tax dollars to fund new programs, people need to be held accountable. Just as Bill O'Reily so brilliantly stated: Why aren't the so-called black leaders telling black women to quit having children out of wedlock? The deconstruction of the 'Black Family' is what he gave as the number one reason of problems in the black communities.

Another thing: I notice that the social worker friend seems to have what I notice with most Democratic/Left-Wing supporters- that is the Master-Slave fetish....

Let me explain....

During slavery (Democratic) slave masters felt that they must at least be responisble for the slave's up-keep (food, shelter, medical, etc) and so they provided these things, at the same time witholding information (education) that would allow the slaves to be free and provide for themselves. This allowed the master to remain in a control and ecnomically more dominate postion over his slave at all times.

Social Workers/ all liberals have this EXACT same mentality...instead of saying, "Let me show you how to apply for college so that you can become more marketble and eventually climb out of poverty...let me explain to you why having multiple children out of wedlock will hold you back..." etc, they take on the slave master's mentality.
edit on 24-7-2013 by ButterCookie because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 04:49 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Okay, this is getting frustrating.

It's frustrating because I really do agree with you on certain points. I do agree that many "black" people hide behind the struggles of their forefathers to escape their own accountability. I wholeheartedly agree that such behaviour is ultimately more destructive than any surviving instance of institutional racism. I'd even go as far to say that the so-called "black leaders" in the African-American community are pretty much useless.

But you keep using this word: "all". Surely, with your past experience, you've learnt how over-used this word is? I really want to agree with you, but when you say things like "all liberals" or "all leftists" it just hurts your argument. You were sick and tired of black people blaming "all white people", and you even dropped religion, where thinking in absolutes is the M.O. of many adherents. Liberalism is such a broad ideology, like conservatism.

What if I were to say that "Republicans/ all conservatives are reactionary, illogical and exhibit properties of the jingoism present in the old British Empire?" Stop painting us all with the same brush; it's hypocritical.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   

Originally posted by ihavenoaccount
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Okay, this is getting frustrating.

It's frustrating because I really do agree with you on certain points. I do agree that many "black" people hide behind the struggles of their forefathers to escape their own accountability. I wholeheartedly agree that such behaviour is ultimately more destructive than any surviving instance of institutional racism. I'd even go as far to say that the so-called "black leaders" in the African-American community are pretty much useless.

But you keep using this word: "all". Surely, with your past experience, you've learnt how over-used this word is? I really want to agree with you, but when you say things like "all liberals" or "all leftists" it just hurts your argument. You were sick and tired of black people blaming "all white people", and you even dropped religion, where thinking in absolutes is the M.O. of many adherents. Liberalism is such a broad ideology, like conservatism.

What if I were to say that "Republicans/ all conservatives are reactionary, illogical and exhibit properties of the jingoism present in the old British Empire?" Stop painting us all with the same brush; it's hypocritical.


Well pardon me...most liberals. Better?

But really, it is all liberals. Is what I said not a liberal point of view- to kepp throwing tax dollars at a problem under the guise of social programs, instead of holding a person accountable?

If you disagree, then you don't hold this liberal viewpoint.



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 06:31 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Much better. Of course, I could say a lot about "most" conservatives, but we'd be going rather off-topic.

I dunno... maybe it's liberal by US standards, but no. This could have a lot to do with the fact that I'm from the UK, in which case you could say that this problem is none of my concern, but black people as a collective are facing these same problems all over the West.

If liberalism, at its core, is about liberty (in the name), individualism and true meritocracy, then it certainly concerns itself with challenging counter-intuitive viewpoints like the self-defeatist behaviour one sees in "black communities". It's because I'm a liberal that I feel the need to pull other black people up on their prejudices and ill-conceived notions of self-entitlement. What you're describing sounds more like unregulated unsocial democracy.

Many of us seek to transcend arbitrary groupings because of how inaccurate and limiting they can be. But at the drop of a hat, we're quick to relegate our peers to a cookie-cutter image of what we perceive to be true. As a black person that has been constantly ridiculed by both my black and non-black peers for not playing up to the stereotype, I've had to learn to discard my assumptions as quickly as possible. Without meaning to sound intrusive, is this your experience too?



posted on Jul, 24 2013 @ 10:21 PM
link   
reply to post by ihavenoaccount
 


Very.

But while one would think that liberalism has something to do with 'liberty', it actually does not. Taking Constitutional Law, I learned that the terms 'liberal' and 'conservative' mean one's interpretation of the Constitution:

Conservatives have a 'conservative', or narrow viewpoint of the Constitution, which means the words mean exactly what they say, our rights our laid out and shall not be infringed upon, and conservation in the amount of government power.

Liberals have a 'liberal', or broad interpretation of the Constitution, which means the one can interpret it how they see fit. In other words, its flexible. Also, they take the viewpoint of a very 'liberal' government, meaning a large portion of power is concentrated in the federal gov't and not the states or the individual.

With this understanding, do you consider your self to be liberal?



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 06:29 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Wow, not that many people I have talked to even know where those labels of liberals and conservatives came from, and what they are supposed to mean. I always found it interesting that a lot of people apply labels to themselves without even really understanding the meaning of said labels.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 08:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by TKDRL
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Wow, not that many people I have talked to even know where those labels of liberals and conservatives came from, and what they are supposed to mean. I always found it interesting that a lot of people apply labels to themselves without even really understanding the meaning of said labels.


I know, right?

I admit that I had no clue where the terms came from and now it makes so much more sense, especially when you consider the policies that each group supports.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 09:17 AM
link   
When you accept such labels, you also accept all of the hidden assumptions people carry within their own minds about those labels. They restrict you within that person's preconceived notions, in their mind. And then when you act contrary to what that person thinks about you because of the label they've given you, they're shocked.

So her family and friends think they've got her pigeonholed and when she seeks things they do not value, education, eloquent speaking, broadening of her own horizons they ridicule her and put another label on her.

Liberal, conservative?

I'm me, f the rest!
edit on 25-7-2013 by jadedANDcynical because: typo



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 09:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by jadedANDcynical
When you accept such labels, you also accept all of the hidden assumptions people carry within their own minds about those labels. They restrict you within that person's preconceived notions, in their mind. And then when you act contrary to what that person thinks about you because of the label they've given you, they're shocked.

So her family and friends think they've got her pigeonholed and when she seeks things they do not value, education, eloquent speaking, broadening of her own horizons they ridicule her and put another label on her.

Liberal, conservative?

I'm me, f the rest!
edit on 25-7-2013 by jadedANDcynical because: typo


Kind of...

However, you can be 'conservative' on some topics and 'liberal' on others...

I think that when a person considers /labels themself either conservative or liberal, they are merely desribing the way they view MOST issues.

For example, I would consider myself 'conservative', but I am not religious at all- therefore, I do not support policies that entangle church and state.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Ah... I see what's happened here.

I'm talking in quite a general context. Liberalism has everything to do with liberty in the grand scheme of things, but the American condition is rather unique, since most of its ideologies evolved (at least partially) separately from the rest of the world.

This is what I call liberalism. J.S. Mill, Jeremy Bentham and other thinkers who are considered generally to be the "heart of liberalism", in essence, the missing link between classical and modern schools, resonate most strongly with me. They'd probably be dubbed libertarians in the US, though.

So that being said, I'm very much for limited government. Things like public healthcare are causes one can get behind (our NHS is far from perfect, but it could be so, so much worse without it), but otherwise, a nanny state will always crumble eventually.

So all things considered, one could still call me a European liberal or a left-libertarian or whatever. Depends on the judge, really. The label really doesn't matter, but I get kinda pedantic about them when they're used!


It seems more like a misunderstanding on my part, really. American politics really is a different ballgame!


P.S. Sorry for going so off-topic.
edit on 25-7-2013 by ihavenoaccount because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 12:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by ihavenoaccount
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Ah... I see what's happened here.

I'm talking in quite a general context. Liberalism has everything to do with liberty in the grand scheme of things, but the American condition is rather unique, since most of its ideologies evolved (at least partially) separately from the rest of the world.

This is what I call liberalism. J.S. Mill, Jeremy Bentham and other thinkers who are considered generally to be the "heart of liberalism", in essence, the missing link between classical and modern schools, resonate most strongly with me. They'd probably be dubbed libertarians in the US, though.

So that being said, I'm very much for limited government. Things like public healthcare are causes one can get behind (our NHS is far from perfect, but it could be so, so much worse without it), but otherwise, a nanny state will always crumble eventually.

So all things considered, one could still call me a European liberal or a left-libertarian or whatever. Depends on the judge, really. The label really doesn't matter, but I get kinda pedantic about them when they're used!


It seems more like a misunderstanding on my part, really. American politics really is a different ballgame!


P.S. Sorry for going so off-topic.
edit on 25-7-2013 by ihavenoaccount because: (no reason given)


No worries


I definitely like exploring this topic because the more one knows, the more one grows.



posted on Jul, 25 2013 @ 04:54 PM
link   
I've read half the comments to this thread and I must say it was a stimulating read. More important than stating my personal opinion on the subject is to just sit back and enjoy the great dialogue it has created. I'm sure the OP didn't intend for this to happen when she created the thread because she seems very naive about race and life in general. Nevertheless, the ceaseless arguing in this thread with everyone sticking to their guns and seldom giving up an inch is enlightening in itself. Whenever two opposing viewpoints come to some quick middle-of-the-road agreement I get very disappointed, there is something inauthentic about it like one resigns to accept a half truth.

I would also like to thank the Mods for letting everyone have a good deal of latitude to express themselves and their passionate views.

In the end, the discussion is not about race. It is about power. Race is, always has been, and always will be, an intermediate step between individuals and the attainment of power. Anyone who has posted on this thread who thinks they are talking about a certain group's ignorance, or social justice, or innate human equality, or empowerment is mistaken. Race is an illusion on so many levels. Wake up.
edit on 25-7-2013 by djr33222 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 26 2013 @ 01:59 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Couldn't agree more.....nicely said!




posted on Jul, 27 2013 @ 04:04 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Social Workers/ all liberals have this EXACT same mentality...instead of saying, "Let me show you how to apply for college so that you can become more marketble and eventually climb out of poverty...let me explain to you why having multiple children out of wedlock will hold you back..." etc, they take on the slave master's mentality.


Are you saying that (ALL) liberals (and ALL social workers - of course) have never encouraged minority students to pursue education?

Are you, in fact - saying that ALL liberals (as in ALL?) are working towards enslaving minorities?

Liberals are slavers now?

But not the conservatives? They got it going on - according to you? Is that ALL conservatives?

And are you also saying that all African Americans, or for that matter - minorities in any category - are too stupid, lazy or complacent to see this or care? That they're too bigoted to be objective?

But not you - right?

You really know how to pick your crowd Ms. Different - and then work it for all it's worth

You've dared to be different, and now you are ostracized - by your own peeps. And you are here to...what? Garner support - get some hugs - prove how stupid liberals and your own people are?

Life is funny. So is ATS (and oh, how I've missed you - after all )

A whole lot of blood, sweat and tears...lives - entire lives - devoted and lost fighting for freedom and equality. And here we are, in this day and age - free to bellyache about how hard it is to be different when everyone else is the same

Free to whine about how difficult it is to be superior...

I guess it was all worth it then

:-)


edit on 7/27/2013 by Spiramirabilis because: something about freedom and whining



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 11:25 AM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


Without even reading your post (YET), let me educate you on something.

When you are engaged in an intellectual discourse, statements usually are going to be general. Statements are based on a study or observation from a segment of the group that is being discussed.

In NO WAY can any person be LITERALLY talking about ALL of a group.

It is not humanly possible to know ALL of a group. This is known without being said, amongst intellectuals.

It is without saying that there will be EXCEPTIONS.

So when a person retorts by 1st saying "You can't say ALL......(blah,blah)", they are merely trying to defract from the argument at hand.

Now I will read your post....



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Spiramirabilis
 


And now that I have read your post, I see why I assumed that you didn't really have a point; its because you don't.

Because if I were to ask what your point was, what would it be? The OP is initially talking about the difficulties of daring to be different in the black community, and I cited some examples. The nature of the thread hinges on the fact that blacks can indeed be very racist, contrary to MOST liberal thinking, and also that there is now a subculture in the black community that is anti-intellectual and promotes deviant behavior (ie, support of Trayvon Martin assaulting another person).

You mention all the blood, sweat, and tears of predecessors before me- I'm supposing you are referring to black pioneers that broke the color, educational, and work force barriers. They did do that- and all to see it go to waste by this new culture among blacks to be against the very things that were fought for.

And thanks for the compliment of calling me "Ms. Different"; after all, that supports the title of this thread.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 11:45 AM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 

i'm not sure how this will be received, but here goes nothing:

blacks tend to have a tribal mindset. i mean this in a very literal way, not a demeaning way. going against the tribe will result in your ostracism. trying to be friends with people who are perceived to be in another "tribe" probably won't go well either.

i applaud your bravery and independence. the more people who be themselves and who stick up for what is right over what is "expected", the better our society will become.



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 01:26 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Without even reading your post (YET), let me educate you on something.

By all means - go ahead...

It is not humanly possible to know ALL of a group.

Spot on - you have just - apparently - and, after a great deal of finger pointing, insulting and good old fashioned generalizing - educated yourself

This is known without being said, amongst intellectuals.

:-)

So when a person retorts by 1st saying "You can't say ALL......(blah,blah)", they are merely trying to defract from the argument at hand.

Merely? That WAS my argument. Was I not obvious enough? :-)

Maybe, just maybe - when an intellectual decides to take the time to 'educate' someone without first reading the whole post - they're trying to do a little distractin' (and puffing up) all their own

Maybe :-)



posted on Jul, 28 2013 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by ButterCookie
 


Because if I were to ask what your point was, what would it be? The OP is initially talking about the difficulties of daring to be different in the black community, and I cited some examples.

My point would be - that I replied to another post - and not your OP

That post began veering wildly off course - it was accusatory, insulting, inaccurate - nothing but opinion

I asked - in my reply to that specific post - a handful of questions that for some reason you've chosen not to answer. Instead, you decided to educate me

Thanks :-)

You and I may not be sisters - Buttercookie - in one sense. But we are both outspoken and opinionated American women. So, we are sisters of another color - perhaps

I find it both interesting and predictable when you choose to chicken out

We didn't start the fire Buttercookie - neither one of us - but you can bet your bottom dollar I am going to pipe up when I see someone tossing on another log

I have a dream. And yeah - it's that dream. Silly, naive, egalitarian me. You'll have to forgive me if I make a fuss when I see people who are not part of the solution instead feed their egos by working to maintain the problem

There are problems with our system - obviously. Any fool can see that. But you used this thread - and race - to play partisan politics. Just another contribution towards dividing the people in this country. You want to accuse liberals of causing all the damage - and you won't even own up to your own words

But, as long as we're here - about your OP...

You threw your dad, who you love, under the bus for a few pats from a room full of strangers

Fathers are often disappointed in their daughters. And speaking as a daughter - we are sometimes disappointed in our fathers. Life is like that

I'm struck by how hurt you were at his disapproval when you can't seem to see his point of view any better than he can see yours. Maybe your dad is a racist - you know him - I don't. But I think it's a little disingenuous to pretend you can't understand his disappointment in the outcome of this case - and factor that into his reaction

For that matter - no matter what your opinion - strange that you can't see how much is wrong with this case - from start to finish

...and also that there is now a subculture in the black community that is anti-intellectual and promotes deviant behavior (ie, support of Trayvon Martin assaulting another person).

Yes - all the protest, outrage - pain...coming from all kinds of people - black, white, liberals - and yes, Buttercookie - even from conservatives - it's all nothing more than anti-intellectualism

Because - of course, Trayvon Martin was nothing but a thug - and he had it coming


edit on 7/28/2013 by Spiramirabilis because: enough is enough



new topics

top topics



 
182
<< 44  45  46    48 >>

log in

join