It's March 19, 2025, 01:21:22 AM
not about dumbing anyone dumb just pretty sure that poster is a radical liberal shill who would be giving cube high praise if he was out there proppin up kamala harris campaign cats who act like black people are a monolith and are selling out if they don’t vote democrat always been funnystyle to me
LOL 😆 There's also some people who would say that a Jewish person using AAVE is borderline narcolepsySo tired 😫
not sure what that is… the idea of speaking “black” is a racist concept to begin with.when you grow up in LA and hang wit a certain crowd then you all share common slang … black white hispanic middle eastern asian etc.probably different in australia ….. but back to what i was sayin, this safe + sound cat been very pretentious for a minute now …. his schtick is old and he’s back on his bs, hating on cube for not being a liberal. on code for him.
Forget meDo you
Calling me a “radical liberal shill” and making assumptions about my political leanings doesn’t address the points I raised about Ice Cube’s actions. My critique isn’t about who he should or shouldn’t support politically—it’s about the inconsistency between his current associations and the values he built his reputation on, particularly his opposition to systemic racism and injustice. 1. Black People Are Not a Monolith:Nowhere did I suggest that Black people are a monolith or that they should all vote Democrat. Criticizing Cube for associating with people who have actively worked against the interests of Black communities isn’t about party politics; it’s about the principles Cube used to stand for, regardless of political affiliation. It’s worth noting that there are other political paths Cube could take without aligning with figures who have demonstrated publicly racist stances. 2. Misrepresentation:You’re shifting the discussion to politics, but my point was about accountability and consistency in values, not party allegiance. If Cube were to support any candidate or figure—whether Democratic, Republican, or independent—while still holding firm to the values of justice and equality that defined his early career, I would respect that. However, the issue here is his aligning with figures who represent the very systems he once fought against. 3. Understanding the Impact:Cube’s political choices matter not because of who he votes for, but because of who he aligns himself with publicly. These are not neutral figures—they are individuals whose actions and rhetoric have worked against racial equity. Critiquing that isn’t about “forcing people to vote Democrat”; it’s about holding public figures accountable for the company they keep and how those associations reflect their values. 4. Keeping the Conversation on Point:This discussion is about Cube and the shift in his public persona, not about my personal politics. If you want to defend his associations, then I’d welcome a reasoned argument on how those align with the values he used to espouse. Name-calling and political generalizations don’t address the core of the conversation.My criticism stands: Cube’s current actions are difficult to reconcile with his earlier advocacy, and that’s the issue—not whether he supports one party or another.
the current democratic plantation is much closer to “systemic racism” than who he “aligned himself with”, despite what the liberal media told u ….. so in essence, he’s basically fighting the spell the community is currently under ala “vote blue or you not black” which is rooted in that oppression he was always fighting critiquing him for sitting down wit the conservatives to see what they’re willing to offer is not the business and has nothing to do wit his previous politics … in fact, it lines up quite well with everything he’s always represented in fact, he even went at jews recently.. which although i obviously do not condone, thats just always who cubes been. he’s willing to consider anything.. sometimes he’s been wrong and sometimes he’s been right. but he keeps an open mind, which is what makes cube.
I understand that you’re framing Cube’s recent actions as breaking free from a supposed “Democratic plantation,” but let’s not lose sight of the bigger picture. Again, my argument isn’t about defending one political party over another—it’s about Cube’s consistency in values and whether his recent actions truly align with the principles that defined his early career. 1. Systemic Racism and Political Parties:The concept of systemic racism isn’t tied to any one political party—it’s a pervasive issue that spans across institutions. My critique of Cube is not about whether he should vote Democrat or Republican, but about who he’s aligning with and what those individuals represent. People like Tucker Carlson and Donald Trump have built platforms that frequently deny or downplay the existence of systemic racism, which runs counter to Cube’s past advocacy. Simply “seeing what conservatives have to offer” isn’t the issue—it’s that he’s sitting down with people whose public records on race are overwhelmingly negative. 2. Breaking Free or Compromising?:If Cube is trying to challenge the idea that Black people must “vote blue or else,” that’s fine in theory. However, doing so by aligning with people who have actively harmed the Black community and shown little regard for civil rights is a questionable way to go about it. How does sitting down with figures like Steve Bannon, who has a history of promoting white nationalism, help Cube’s broader goals of fighting oppression? It seems more like a compromise of principles than a challenge to the system. 3. Open Mind vs. Accountability:You say that Cube’s willingness to consider anything, including meeting with people who oppose the causes he once stood for, is part of what makes him who he is. But being open-minded doesn’t mean you’re free from accountability. Just because Cube has historically been willing to engage with controversial figures doesn’t mean it’s always the right call. Who you align with matters, especially when those figures have actively promoted ideas that run counter to racial justice. 4. Consistency Matters:You bring up his recent comments about Jews, and while I don’t condone that either, it highlights the deeper issue: Cube’s willingness to shift or compromise his positions when it suits him, rather than standing firmly on the values he once championed. This inconsistency is what makes it difficult to see his recent moves as anything but a departure from the principles that made him a voice for justice in the first place.In the end, this isn’t about Cube being right or wrong every time—it’s about holding him accountable when his actions no longer align with the principles that defined his early work. I’m not arguing that Cube needs to stay in any particular political box, but when he aligns with people who are clearly hostile to the causes he once stood for, it’s worth asking whether he’s still fighting the same fight—or if he’s lost his way.Also, I feel like I need to make this point again because it seems to be continually ignored: My critique of Ice Cube isn’t about party politics or whether he should support Democrats or Republicans. I’m focusing on his values and how his current actions—particularly his associations with people like Tucker Carlson, Steve Bannon, and Donald Trump—seem to contradict the principles he built his career on. However, your responses continue to pivot into broader political debates and personal attacks, which sidesteps the main points I’m making.Rather than addressing the specific figures Cube is engaging with and how their actions clash with his past advocacy, you continue to pivot the conversation to political rhetoric about “the Democratic plantation” and accuse me of being a “radical liberal shill.” This doesn’t address the actual points I’ve raised about Cube’s inconsistent values or the consequences of his associations. My critique is focused on his principles and how his actions affect his credibility, not partisan allegiance. I’m trying to have a conversation about accountability and whether Cube’s recent actions are consistent with the values he once stood for. Deflecting through personal attacks only undermines the dialogue.
bro we’re going in circlesi don’t think there’s enough evidence to say the cats cube sat wit are proponents of systemic racism ….. possibly ignorant participants, but the bigger picture = when u sit down wit people in power and reach common ground, you can get far more accomplished. period.
I think the bigger question is..... what are YOU doing?Do you walk your talk?Have YOU collaborated with large and small enterprise to combat the wealth divide and pay gap?Have YOU compiled a contract in collaboration with notable community leaders to address racial profiling and police brutality?Have YOU started a successful enterprise to give Black athletes a platform all while being blackballed by the higher ups?Do you have a 40 year history of propelling the voice of Black America?Would YOU sit with your enemies to bring about recognition, reconciliation and justice for your people?
I appreciate your point, but to claim there’s a lack of evidence regarding the named individuals’ views and actions related to systemic racism isn’t accurate. There is well-documented evidence of their problematic rhetoric and policies that conflict with the fight against systemic inequality. Going through an exhaustive list here begins to deviate from my own point. As I mentioned earlier, the history of Trump's racism (much less his father's) alone has its own Wiki page. However, I’d like to point out a few examples to clarify why these figures have been criticized for supporting or downplaying systemic racism: 1. Tucker Carlson: • Tucker Carlson has consistently used his platform to downplay systemic racism, often referring to it as a “hoax” and questioning the reality of racial injustice in America. He has also defended individuals like the police officer who killed George Floyd, which has drawn widespread criticism from civil rights advocates. • His show has frequently aired segments promoting white nationalist talking points, which has led to calls for boycotts from advertisers and rebukes from civil rights groups like the Anti-Defamation League (ADL). 2. Steve Bannon: • Steve Bannon has been linked to white nationalist ideologies, particularly through his leadership at Breitbart News, which he described as a “platform for the alt-right” during his time as executive chairman. The “alt-right” movement has been associated with promoting racist, xenophobic, and white supremacist beliefs. • His political strategies often involve stoking racial divisions, particularly around issues like immigration and national identity. 3. Donald Trump: • Donald Trump’s record on race includes multiple instances of racist rhetoric and actions. From refusing to rent to African American tenants to promoting the “birther” conspiracy about Barack Obama to referring to Mexican immigrants as “rapists,” or his former Chief of Staff's claim of him saying "Hitler did some good things too" and his need for "the kind of generals Hitler had," his public comments and actions have been frequently criticized for racial insensitivity and worse. • His administration also rolled back civil rights protections and denounced efforts to address systemic racism, such as reducing funding for programs aimed at combating racial inequality. • Trump’s public statements have led to significant concerns, including by civil rights organizations, and his actions led to well-documented criticism on both national and global levels.These are just a few examples of why these individuals have been heavily criticized when it comes to issues of race and systemic racism. This isn’t a matter of political bias; it’s about publicly documented actions and statements that have had real consequences for racial discourse in America.While it’s important to engage with people across political lines, we can’t ignore the broader implications of who Cube is aligning with. There’s clear evidence that these figures have consistently undermined the fight against systemic racism, and that’s why his recent actions are concerning, especially given the principles he once stood for.If you have further evidence that Cube’s meetings with these individuals are producing meaningful change, I’m open to that conversation. But the existing evidence on the named parties shows that they’ve historically promoted views that run counter to the fight for racial justice, and that can’t be overlooked.Your claim that this conversation is “going in circles” seems to avoid addressing the substantive points presented here. The core issue I’ve raised isn’t about personal views alone but rather how the platforms and influence of these individuals have perpetuated racist ideologies. You’ve yet to directly address this evidence, instead moving away from these central examples.Thus, it’s not a matter of lack of evidence, but rather acknowledging how these facts align with broader patterns of promoting systematic racism through policy, rhetoric, and media platforms. If we can focus on the facts at hand, we can engage in a productive dialogue rather than deviate from the core argument.
Home
Help
Login
Register
Print
