The irony of the New York Times’ 1619 Project...

[oxmixmudd]

That would explain why you are more prone to racist thinking than the rest of us. Thankfully, my upbringing was considerably different than yours, and I have never in my life thought it unusual for people of multiple races to live and work together. I even knew several interracial married couples when I was younger, and it never once occurred to me to see it as anything other than perfectly normal.

MM - do you EVER not twist another persons words?

I just have to ask how seared your conscience must be to take a person that is arguing FOR our responsibility to help reduce racist thought and against the many backhanded racist references you have made in this thread and then try to make it sound like I'm the one that is coming from a racist perspective. It is not atypical of evil men to do so, but I had so far been assuming most or our disagreements were simple misunderstandings or different perspectives held by two basically good men.

I guess I should stop assuming you have a conscience or any desire to be a good person. That would appear to be the mistake I keep making as I try to converse with you.



Jim

[lilpixieofterror]

MM - do you EVER not twist another persons words?

I just have to ask how seared your conscience must be to take a person that is arguing FOR our responsibility to help reduce racist thought and against the many backhanded racist references you have made in this thread and then try to make it sound like I'm the one that is coming from a racist perspective. It is not atypical of evil men to do so, but I had so far been assuming most or our disagreements were simple misunderstandings or different perspectives held by two basically good men.

I guess I should stop assuming you have a conscience or any desire to be a good person. That would appear to be the mistake I keep making as I try to converse with you.



Jim

Racist (liberal definition) - a conservative that doesn’t agree with me.

It’s quite telling that those that actually grew up in the post civil rights era, who were exposed to lots of races in their youth, spend considerable less amount of time looking for racism and seeing it all around them vs those that did. It’s almost as if late gen x, Millennials, and gen z are not all that concerned about the race of their neighbors.

[Mountain Man]

MM - do you EVER not twist another persons words?

Yes.

...the many backhanded racist references you have made in this thread...

Speaking of twisting another persons words.

Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hypocrite strikes again.

[Adrift]

MM - do you EVER not twist another persons words?

I just have to ask how seared your conscience must be to take a person that is arguing FOR our responsibility to help reduce racist thought and against the many backhanded racist references you have made in this thread and then try to make it sound like I'm the one that is coming from a racist perspective. It is not atypical of evil men to do so, but I had so far been assuming most or our disagreements were simple misunderstandings or different perspectives held by two basically good men.

I guess I should stop assuming you have a conscience or any desire to be a good person. That would appear to be the mistake I keep making as I try to converse with you.



Jim

Huh. I parsed that differently. By "more prone to racist thinking" I assumed he was asserting that you were more sensitive to racial issues because you were raised in an environment where racism was actively perpetrated in very obvious ways, where he (like I) grew up in an environment where racial tension wasn't much a thing. I didn't take him to mean that you're a racist because of the things you experienced growing up in the South. Did I misunderstand MM's intent?

[Mountain Man]

Racist (liberal definition) - a conservative that doesn’t agree with me.

It’s quite telling that those that actually grew up in the post civil rights era, who were exposed to lots of races in their youth, spend a considerable less amount of time looking for racism and seeing it all around them vs those that did. It’s almost as if late gen x, Millennials, and gen z are not all that concerned about the race of their neighbors.

And ox, by his own admission, appears to have had a very racist upbringing. Unlike ox, I can't name a single person in my extended family who I could describe as a white nationalist. I can't even recall my grand parents ever saying anything disparaging about a person of another race.

[oxmixmudd]

Jim, I'm asking why is abandonment by fathers so much worse now than it was 50-60 years ago when racism was much much worse? I think it may have to do with the imposed qualification for Welfare benefits, where the mother and child could not have the man living in the home to collect. But I'm working on memory. And I'm not sure why it would be racist to call black men out to stand up and care for their own children. Or give up gangster rape which is deeply sexist in nature, and honor their women.

Thank you for asking and talking - that gives me hope. There are, in fact, many issues like that. And they are hard to talk about, because it is very hard to address them without it raising the specter of the past use of elements like that to justify overt racism.

To your first question, tt had very dark racist implications in the context of that specific conversation because most people here are trying to diminish or eliminate any recognition of the reality of present day racism, or any acknowledgement that the long term consequences of Slavery and Racism are seen in the lingering disparities we see between the Black and the White populations. That question - in that context - has deep racist roots - that Black people are inferior to White people - in this case morally inferior. I can only imagine how deep a hole you'd have to dig out of if you had asked that in the context of this thread before an average inner city African American audience where the wounds of those sorts of statements are still raw.

In the end, I believe that it is a consequence of the poverty and crime and broken families that are a legacy of racism and slavery, perhaps compounded by changing social morays that more negatively affect the poor. But to change it, we have to change how the children affected by it are raised, the culture they grow up in, the environment they grow up in, their access to education, nutrition and a host of other factors. But to change THAT you have to change the skillsets, attitudes and other fundamental elements of who the parents are from the previous generation, and the damage caused by their own environments and their own broken families. There is no easy fix. But my point is to do anything at all, we have to first recognize that there are real historical factors coupled with present day factors that are feeding this cycle, and they stem from the Slavery and racism that laid their foundation. And most importantly, it is not really reasonable or right to look the other way and expect that cycle to fix itself.


Jim

[oxmixmudd]

Racist (liberal definition) - a conservative that doesn’t agree with me.

It’s quite telling that those that actually grew up in the post civil rights era, who were exposed to lots of races in their youth, spend considerable less amount of time looking for racism and seeing it all around them vs those that did. It’s almost as if late gen x, Millennials, and gen z are not all that concerned about the race of their neighbors.

You are another person that apparently has no capacity to argue a point without first twisting the other fellows words into an unrecognizable form of the original.

Jim

[Mountain Man]

Huh. I parsed that differently. By "more prone to racist thinking" I assumed he was asserting that you were more sensitive to racial issues because you were raised in an environment where racism was actively perpetrated in very obvious ways, where he (like I) grew up in an environment where racial tension wasn't much a thing. I didn't take him to mean that you're a racist because of the things you experienced growing up in the South. Did I misunderstand MM's intent?

It's a bit of both. He seems to be more sensitive to racism to the point that he finds it even where it doesn't exist, but he also supports policies like affirmative action that operate on the premise that blacks can only succeed if standards are artificially lowered.

Basically, it's classic white guilt.

[lilpixieofterror]

And ox, by his own admission, appears to have had a very racist upbringing. Unlike ox, I can't name a single person in my extended family who I could describe as a white nationalist. I can't even recall my grand parents ever saying anything disparaging about a person of another race.

I have to go generations back in mine until I start running into those I suspect were more racist. To be honest, my racial background would have caused quite a stir, around the late 19th/early 20th century. My one of my great great grandfathers was an Italian that married a white women. This was a pretty big deal back in the late 1880’s when they married and had 9 mixed raced children. Italians were killed, doing much less in that era. Yet nobody today would bat an eye at such a marriage. Which is kind of funny mainly due to the fact their granddaughter, my grandmother, married my grandfather, whose background included confederate vets that likely would not have been happy about that. Today I have cousins that are half black, half Latino, and half Asian. Any white supremest I’m related to likely died decades before I was born or I never met them and don’t even know anything about them.

[lilpixieofterror]

You are another person that apparently has no capacity to argue a point without first twisting the other fellows words into an unrecognizable form of the original.

Jim

In other words, I spot your logical faults and you can’t stand it. Jim Crow is dead and it’s legacy exist in the idea that non whites are too stupid to do well on their own and need white guilt infested whitey, to give them a hand.

[seer]

Thank you for asking and talking - that gives me hope. There are, in fact, many issues like that. And they are hard to talk about, because it is very hard to address them without it raising the specter of the past use of elements like that to justify overt racism.

To your first question, tt had very dark racist implications in the context of that specific conversation because most people here are trying to diminish or eliminate any recognition of the reality of present day racism, or any acknowledgement that the long term consequences of Slavery and Racism are seen in the lingering disparities we see between the Black and the White populations. That question - in that context - has deep racist roots - that Black people are inferior to White people - in this case morally inferior. I can only imagine how deep a hole you'd have to dig out of if you had asked that in the context of this thread before an average inner city African American audience where the wounds of those sorts of statements are still raw.

In the end, I believe that it is a consequence of the poverty and crime and broken families that are a legacy of racism and slavery, perhaps compounded by changing social morays that more negatively affect the poor. But to change it, we have to change how the children affected by it are raised, the culture they grow up in, the environment they grow up in, their access to education, nutrition and a host of other factors. But to change THAT you have to change the skillsets, attitudes and other fundamental elements of who the parents are from the previous generation, and the damage caused by their own environments and their own broken families. There is no easy fix. But my point is to do anything at all, we have to first recognize that there are real historical factors coupled with present day factors that are feeding this cycle, and they stem from the Slavery and racism that laid their foundation. And most importantly, it is not really reasonable or right to look the other way and expect that cycle to fix itself.


Jim

And that is why, to me, we start with school choice. Something like 70% of these families want choice. There is no evidence that these inner city schools will get better, no matter how much money you pour in. My second proposition is 40 acres and a mule (which we should have done after the Civil war). We bull doze all the plighted neighbors (where no one lives) in these cities and deed the cleaned up land (which is mostly city owned) to African Americans. They could just sit on the property, get a building loan using the property as collateral for a small house, or sell it to investors.

[lilpixieofterror]

Thank you for asking and talking - that gives me hope. There are, in fact, many issues like that. And they are hard to talk about, because it is very hard to address them without it raising the specter of the past use of elements like that to justify overt racism.

To your first question, tt had very dark racist implications in the context of that specific conversation because most people here are trying to diminish or eliminate any recognition of the reality of present day racism, or any acknowledgement that the long term consequences of Slavery and Racism are seen in the lingering disparities we see between the Black and the White populations. That question - in that context - has deep racist roots - that Black people are inferior to White people - in this case morally inferior. I can only imagine how deep a hole you'd have to dig out of if you had asked that in the context of this thread before an average inner city African American audience where the wounds of those sorts of statements are still raw.

In the end, I believe that it is a consequence of the poverty and crime and broken families that are a legacy of racism and slavery, perhaps compounded by changing social morays that more negatively affect the poor. But to change it, we have to change how the children affected by it are raised, the culture they grow up in, the environment they grow up in, their access to education, nutrition and a host of other factors. But to change THAT you have to change the skillsets, attitudes and other fundamental elements of who the parents are from the previous generation, and the damage caused by their own environments and their own broken families. There is no easy fix. But my point is to do anything at all, we have to first recognize that there are real historical factors coupled with present day factors that are feeding this cycle, and they stem from the Slavery and racism that laid their foundation. And most importantly, it is not really reasonable or right to look the other way and expect that cycle to fix itself.


Jim

We’ve been doing this stuff since before I was born, to the tune of around 1 trillion dollars in the past 50 years. How well has it worked out?

[lilpixieofterror]

And that is why, to me, we start with school choice. Something like 70% of these families want choice. There is no evidence that these inner city schools will get better, no matter how much money you pour in. My second proposition is 40 acres and a mule (which we should have done after the Civil war). We bull doze all the plighted neighbors (where no one lives) in these cities and deed the cleaned up land (which is mostly city owned) to African Americans. They could just sit on the property, get a building loan using the property as collateral for a small house, or sell it to investors.

Teacher unions fight tooth and nail against school choice.

[Sam]

Closing out my interest in this thread, I would be totally in favor of substantial, directed public investment in historically minority-segregated neighborhoods, with strict regulations in place to ensure that the added value goes to the minority homeowners. Or some form of mass reparations so that most, if not all, historically discriminated-against families and communities can increase the quality and worth of their neighborhoods or relocate.

But the people who just want to ignore generations of discrimination and illicit theft of property and wealth, under the guise that everything today is "fixed", are perpetuating a deeply immoral and, indeed, unsustainable system.

--Sam

And of course, liberals that think blacks are not smart enough to make it without whitey helping them has nothing to do with any of it.

[rogue06]

The city that that township was associated with certainly had a racist past, as it was a stronghold of a one of the more violent branches of the KKK, so there's no denying that there was segregation. One of the famous eating establishments in that city actually had a separate restroom for blacks back in the 50s on the outside of the building (the door is still there, but of course, most people today don't know its history) and there was a "no coloreds" rule for the local swimming hole/and bubblers in the same decade (again, something that the last few generations have no knowledge of, certainly not within the white community).

While I believe some of the segregation was planned, some of it seemed to simply happen naturally. A number of Housing and Urban Development Acts were intended to be a positive help to the poor and underprivileged, and it mostly backfired as it resulted in segregated slums and towers-in-the-park type neighborhoods. And it does appear to be the case that, while some neighborhoods can be blissfully integrated (like the neighborhoods I grew up in), some people truly do desire self-segregation. It's always been that way. Polish tend to live near other Poles, Germans near other Germans, Irish next to Irish, Italians next to Italians, Jews next to Jews, and Blacks next to Blacks. Dearborn likely has the largest Arab population outside of the Middle East, and Minneapolis and St. Paul have extremely large Somali populations. I'm not saying these are wrong or right. I'm saying they just are. And sometimes they're not planned, or if they are planned, they're not always planned with malice.

Even today, if you go to most universities you'll see many various ethnic groups willingly segregating themselves