Author Topic: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks  (Read 286 times)

7even

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 11289
  • Karma: -679
Re: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks
« Reply #25 on: March 05, 2008, 07:00:43 AM »
First off, I think Farrakhan is a fascist asshole and either is too dumb to see how his "support" for Obama facilitates things for Clinton and is of great help in her dirty vilification campaign OR he just doesn't want Obama to be president in a similar way that militant Jews and militant Palestinians in Israel don't want peace; if the most powerful man in the world is black all of a sudden, things will not be easier for him and his brainwashed ideology.

Yes. LOL@People who think Farrakhan is a great person who just wants nothing but the best for his kind. Like most nationalists, harmony is his enemy. Whites electing Obama as their president is one of the worst things that could happen in regards to his agenda.

Second thing: I think 7even meant by "real" or "not real" roots that, assuming that humanity evolved solely in Africa (which is very likely according to current scientific data), you could trace anyone's roots back to Africa, be that a Norwegian's, an Armenian's or a frickin Aborigine's. I'm not gonna argue about this, just kinda felt you had a little communication problem there :)

Of course. I am not necessarily agreeing with this Africans=Originals thesis, but for those blacks who agree with it it is pretty damn wrong to seclude themselves as persons with African roots. (Not that that would be anything particularly awesome to begin with.)

What will not help at all is making up bullshit ideologies reversing the same retarded supremacy claims whites made for a long time modern-age style and backing it up with religious rhethorics and dimwitted pseudo-science.

Exactly my point.
Cause I don't care where I belong no more
What we share or not I will ignore
And I won't waste my time fitting in
Cause I don't think contrast is a sin
No, it's not a sin
 

The_Offence

Re: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks
« Reply #26 on: March 05, 2008, 08:55:18 AM »
come on people do you really think the U.S will let obama win this



even if he did his life would be in danger, some racist group would blow his head off
 

Kill

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5861
  • Karma: 254
Re: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks
« Reply #27 on: March 05, 2008, 09:23:16 AM »
I agree with what you are saying but whites have had their serfdom to it just hasn't been at the same level of what the blacks have had done to them. Ultimately it's about the people at the very top of the food chain, the ones that went along with the system are just the useful idiots/the pawns. Although having said that, I don't believe that compensation should be given to people, that is just setting the clocks back.  Also, how would that be fair on the chinese? who suffered at the hands of the CIA backed Mao, the rural ukranians who were driven to the point of extinction by the Bolsheviks? the Iraqis, if we were to look at horrific history, hundreds of millions of people have been mercilessly destroyed whether physically, economically, spiritually etc. I see the greatest problelem in all of this with the infinite compensating of the victims families of the holocaust. No one should be compensated for previous actions because we all know that even if it were agreed to, you discriminate against another group and I don't feel it's morally justifiable to distinguish between one mass indiscriminate genocide and another.  Secondly any such compensation would hit the ordinary working class and the middle class because were such a change to result, they would say yes we can compensate but we are going to have to double the rate of income tax for example in order to pay for this.
It's not about compensation, I'm speaking of improvement. One of the most detrimental things is this antediluvian eye-for-an-eye attitude. If we wanna get anywhere we'll have to cut the crap; being black does not give you a right to go ahead and demonize whites just because it was done vice versa by their ancestors; being white does not make it your obligation to "make up" for slavery or colonialization. That's also partly what 7even's trying to say here I think.

BUT, to drift off into wishful thinking, while the historical context might be important for analytical purposes, we should be able to look at the world today and see where racism, sexism, human rights violations, etc. are a social and cultural problem (and in what way, to what extent, with what consequences and so on) and we should try to establish a fair system in which no one is born underprivileged and everybody considers everybody else equal. That is of course a utopia, I'm not dumb. But as an ideal picture of how the world should be it's useful in setting up goals and trying to determine what kind of action should be taken. This is an extreme simplification of a very complex issue, but I'm just trying to point in the direction I'm going; idealistic debate should be less concerned with who did what to whom (it should be taken into account though, yes), but much more with what can be done.
 

Turf Hitta

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3374
  • Karma: 13
Re: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks
« Reply #28 on: March 05, 2008, 03:09:05 PM »
Well, it's called free will. It's up to blacks what they want to do with their lives. Blocking your own kind from getting an education by calling them house niggers, uncle toms or white-washed is not going to help, obviously. But that is an image that blacks have to change from within, it's not for whites to say what is looked upon as cool inside of black communities.

Right, but seeing how the (white) people running slavery basically created this mentality, the (white) families and corporations (many of which still exist today) that profited from slavery should not be allowed to stand by and do nothing about it. Why should they be able to profit from the damage and bear NONE of the cost of rectifying the situation?
 

Turf Hitta

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3374
  • Karma: 13
Re: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks
« Reply #29 on: March 05, 2008, 06:32:11 PM »
Hmm... I think affirmative action was more of a PR move than anything, and in the grand scheme of things, it doesn't make much of a difference. It serves to make "the man" look like he cares above all else.
    There are no simple solutions or quick fixes to the historical obstacles facing black communities. Simply "forgetting the past" is not going to solve anything. The culture of slavery and the century or so that followed is probably the greatest of all causes that bred the culture of ignorance, poverty and the general sense of hopelessness that has permeated the black community since the days of slavery. Educate yourself and make something positive of yourself and you are an uncle tom or a "house nigger." Can you see how certain things like making it illegal (as far as the plantations are concerned) for blacks to read or face mutilation or death can make it the "thing to do" to be uneducated? Keep in mind that when the slave owners did these things, they often did them in front of the rest of the slaves to serve as an example to the others of what will happen if you try to educate yourself. That sends an unimaginably powerful message to the people. Is it any wonder then, that the so called "black" thing to do is usually the ignorant thing to do?
  See, my point is, its not good enough to say "whats done is done, now lets move on." Indeed, what's done IS in fact done. Now the question is, what is going to be done to rectify it and how much longer of a wait is it going to be? Its not going to get any easier the more time passes. The damage is done and has permeated generation after generation because these are the lessons that get handed down either by word of mouth or by observation of the children. Something needs to be done to correct this, and I'm sorry, but affirmative action simply isn't cutting it, and its not like its ONLY for black descendants of slaves.
    I argued in an essay for some class I had a few semesters ago that what would help, would be to offer a free college education to descendants of slaves for a period of generations equal to that of slavery. This would serve to alleviate the mentality of ignorance and breed a new black community that values education and affluence. Maybe not perfect, but I'm sure a lot of people would take that over 40 acres and a fuckin mule (which was promised and to this day still not delivered). Other ethnicities have suffered lesser atrocities and have had steps taken to correct them by the US government (internment camps, anyone?). Why should blacks not receive anything after enduring the most diabolical injustice in American history, which as I have noted, reaches far beyond the actual slavery that took places for centuries?
That's an interesting take, although I cannot wholeheartedly agree with it.

First off, I think Farrakhan is a fascist asshole and either is too dumb to see how his "support" for Obama facilitates things for Clinton and is of great help in her dirty vilification campaign OR he just doesn't want Obama to be president in a similar way that militant Jews and militant Palestinians in Israel don't want peace; if the most powerful man in the world is black all of a sudden, things will not be easier for him and his brainwashed ideology.

Second thing: I think 7even meant by "real" or "not real" roots that, assuming that humanity evolved solely in Africa (which is very likely according to current scientific data), you could trace anyone's roots back to Africa, be that a Norwegian's, an Armenian's or a frickin Aborigine's. I'm not gonna argue about this, just kinda felt you had a little communication problem there :)

There are no simple solutions to the problems we are being confronted with in the aftermath of racist white domination and European colonialization, that is of course correct. A problem that we have here is that no child on this planet is born guilty of the atrocities and crimes committed by his/her ancestors, however hideous they were. This is not to say that in today's society we should not feel obliged to improve the conditions for everyone who's been born into poverty and is unfairly handicapped in whatever way. I do absolutely think we have to, but what won't do shit for anyone is creating retarded ideologies and neo-cults designed to "strike back", which is what Farrakhan (just one example of this sort of behavior, of course) does. What makes it all the worse is that those cults are designed for modern society and their ambitions and implications are veiled by a meretricious and hypocritical message of "peace", "equality" and some more blahblah that sounds "righteous" (a word that has been bludgeoned to death by those people), and spiced up with entirely fallacious pseudo-science that won't stand the test of any halfway serious research. This all adds up to a blurry, mind-numb picture like the one drawn by Ras Kass in "Nature of the Threat", e.g., and results in nothing but conflict. It would be a monumental historical moment if anyone ever managed to establish peace in that way and, aside from the fact that it obviously contradicts human nature to get along with each other supported by such ideology in the background, it has never happened in the history of this goddamn planet.

Now, what is absolutely true, to get back to that, is that what whites did to blacks for centuries is hideous and has inflicted permanent damage. This is the main reason why you're completely right that "hey, let's forget about this and be buddies" won't do it. I'm not saying I have the solution to this problem, because really solving it (no doubt we haven't yet) is an incredibly difficult long-term goal to achieve. But what I know for sure that it takes is willingness to cooperate from both sides and mutual respect among people. The intellectual change quite necessarily precedes the practical one. In the 21st century, we're at a point at which any reasonable person should be at the point of settling on a) no one being superior to anyone for crap reasons like their skin color and b) Europeans having inflicted the most damage in the last few centuries. What will help us in achieving that c) no one will have to worry about being oppressed due to skin color, ethicity, gender, etc. is accepting just that, teaching people about it and building on it. What will not help at all is making up bullshit ideologies reversing the same retarded supremacy claims whites made for a long time modern-age style and backing it up with religious rhethorics and dimwitted pseudo-science.


   I pretty much agree with you, so this will be a short response...

   Well first, I have no real opinion on Farakhan other than I think he gets a lot of undue hate. Not saying he's a great man, but I don't find him utterly reprehensible either. Moving on...

   While it is true that a white child is not born with blood on his hands, he is born into affluence and advantages brought about by the unjust actions of his ancestors while the black child is born into a disadvantageous position for the same reason. The black child should not have to suffer simply because crimes were committed against his own ancestors. Why should the descendant of the criminal reap the benefits of his father's crime while the descendant of the victim suffers further?
 

Turf Hitta

  • Muthafuckin' Don!
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3374
  • Karma: 13
Re: Obama/Farakhan controversy reveals media's agneda against blacks
« Reply #30 on: March 05, 2008, 06:42:57 PM »


I agree with what you are saying but whites have had their serfdom to it just hasn't been at the same level of what the blacks have had done to them. Ultimately it's about the people at the very top of the food chain, the ones that went along with the system are just the useful idiots/the pawns. Although having said that, I don't believe that compensation should be given to people, that is just setting the clocks back.  Also, how would that be fair on the chinese? who suffered at the hands of the CIA backed Mao, the rural ukranians who were driven to the point of extinction by the Bolsheviks? the Iraqis, if we were to look at horrific history, hundreds of millions of people have been mercilessly destroyed whether physically, economically, spiritually etc. I see the greatest problelem in all of this with the infinite compensating of the victims families of the holocaust. No one should be compensated for previous actions because we all know that even if it were agreed to, you discriminate against another group and I don't feel it's morally justifiable to distinguish between one mass indiscriminate genocide and another.  Secondly any such compensation would hit the ordinary working class and the middle class because were such a change to result, they would say yes we can compensate but we are going to have to double the rate of income tax for example in order to pay for this.

 So you don't think anything should be done to atone for one of the greatest crimes against humanity in recorded history? When you say compensation, I assume you are speaking in monetary terms since you referenced the "doubling of the income tax rate." First of all, compensation does not have to be monetary. Secondly, the "compensation" would be funded by the families and corporations that enjoy the rewards of their forefathers' crimes. The government would simply serve to enforce the compensation.
   As far as crimes committed against other peoples, they should be compensated in some form or another as well. To me it is a complete insult and a slap in the face to anyone who has unjustly suffered at the hands of a criminal to say that they deserve nothing when an injustice has been committed against them. Using the logic you outlined in this post, there is no reason to incarcerate white collar thieves, rapists, murderers, child molesters, etc. because it would cost too much. How can you let a tremendous crime on a huge scale slide, but you enforce punishment and restitution on comparably insignificant and etremely minor (not to downplay anyone's suffering) crimes?