Independence for Black people

These concepts are socially constructed and have been given much weight. What are your thoughts?
Str8UpMenace
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 118
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 6:02 pm

Independence for Black people

Unread post by Str8UpMenace » July 19th, 2007, 1:51 am

In this country there are too many problems concerning black on white conflicts over the years or even with other races its time black people got their own country and declared independence they have been governed and spat upon by white people and considered the degeneretes of society for too long its time they get their own land to govern on their own maybe give em one the states with the most black population like georgia or louisiana sure this idea will not by liked by white people at first but neither did the british like america's declaration of independence and look where its at now after figthing two wars with the british. if you think i'm crazy coming up with this idea well i'm not the first N.O.I. tried in the 50's n 60's but wasn't too successful. this is a full proof idea to stop racism and from making both races try to conform into each other's societies and cultures which causes more hostilities towards each other. in these days this is a very hard thing to achieve since white people have made black's more cowardly and brainwashed to love their white masters that govern them by making them kill each other than to kill their real enemy as there are more black on black killings than black on white killings compared to 40 or 50 years ago where there were more black on white killings than black on black on killings white people have used the oldest trick the in book on warfare to divide and conquer and this what is taking place now and its time black people call for independence. it can be achieved peacefully as violence would lead it to destruction.

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » July 19th, 2007, 10:22 am

thats stupid, you want freedom and justice, through seperation? just because your pissed off and mad at everyone else, doesn't mean everyone else is, especially every black person. this has been brought up before, and this is not the path to a better and more equal society.

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 19th, 2007, 11:18 am

I'm going to entertain your hair brained idea for a minute. Ask yourself these questions when it comes to making your own country. Where would you get energy from? You just take whats there, like the US would just hand over the power plants and water treatment plants? Not likely, so you have to either A: Get that energy from someone else (IE: US) or make it yourself which means getting the raw materials from someone else (IE: US). So you just split from the states and you took a couple states with you, and now you want the US to just give you or trade you material. Oh wait, you need something to trade with, like currency. OH WAIT! You don't HAVE a currency. Now you need to either use American currency or make your own. You know how nearly impossible it would be to make your own currency and have other countries of the world accept it? So now you want to use American materials AND American currency from a country you just finished leaving. Good luck with that. So what happens to the current inhabitants of those states? How about a goverment infrastructure? Roadways? Foreign relations? Oh, and who gets citizenship in this country? Only black people? Which black people? 100% African, 50%? 25%? How do you determine that? Now are you getting the picture as to why this idea never took off in the first place. America won't just hand over chunks of land for anyone to make a country with, not even Alaska. This new country you're dreaming of would be on par with Cuba in relation to America except you'd be literally connected to America. It would never work.

I love your analogy of this new country like America was to the British. First off America was pretty far removed from Britian geographically. Making a couple wars feasable to win, with Britian having to replenish it's army from thousands of miles away. Secondly look how great off America is doing now! Couldn't have worked out better for them, No? Then you take their brother from the North who never had to fight off Britian or France to become independent and live in relative peace. Heaven forbid you try that, trying to solve the countries internal problems and make peace. No no, let's just start more wars within and divide your nation even more.

Forgive me if this post comes off a bit synical. All sides of the race conflict have to sit down and communicate to solve this, not MORE fighting and dividing.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 19th, 2007, 11:24 am

They might not like us but there is too much to exploit and gain from us to just let us go without a fight. It's sad that America has made us like a gypsy race with no true home, but fuck it we'll prevail.

User avatar
'X'
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 3127
Joined: May 31st, 2004, 10:36 am
Country: Hong Kong, China
If in the United States: North Dakota
What city do you live in now?: ........

Unread post by 'X' » July 19th, 2007, 1:02 pm

EmperorPenguin wrote: I'm going to entertain your hair brained idea for a minute.
I personally wouldn't call it that...

EmperorPenguin wrote: All sides of the race conflict have to sit down and communicate to solve this, not MORE fighting and dividing.
This is a good idea in a fantasy world. But this will never happen. A certain mindset would have to be permantly be destroyed for the above to happen. And since that mindset keeps getting passed on to the masses of a certain people, how can it ever stop?


And not to sound bias, but I think Black folk(especially) have begged to solve this problem of race, begged to be treated fairly, equally, begged to be accepted. Many died trying to achieve this. I think out of any body, Black folk and other people of color are more than willing to 'sit down' and communicate about this issue. Matter of fact, back in the Black folk held 'sit-downs'(literally) and chained themselves up to things just to be treated fairly, to be accepted. So who really needs to be willing to 'sit-down' and communicate on this issue?

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 19th, 2007, 1:19 pm

'X' wrote:
EmperorPenguin wrote: I'm going to entertain your hair brained idea for a minute.
I personally wouldn't call it that...

EmperorPenguin wrote: All sides of the race conflict have to sit down and communicate to solve this, not MORE fighting and dividing.
This is a good idea in a fantasy world. But this will never happen. A certain mindset would have to be permantly be destroyed for the above to happen. And since that mindset keeps getting passed on to the masses of a certain people, how can it ever stop?


And not to sound bias, but I think Black folk(especially) have begged to solve this problem of race, begged to be treated fairly, equally, begged to be accepted. Many died trying to achieve this. I think out of any body, Black folk and other people of color are more than willing to 'sit down' and communicate about this issue. Matter of fact, back in the Black folk held 'sit-downs'(literally) and chained themselves up to things just to be treated fairly, to be accepted. So who really needs to be willing to 'sit-down' and communicate on this issue?
The majority of black folks is still on that begging, lets sit down, it can get better shit, but they say the black middle class (the supposedly sane not ghetto blacks) is increasingly realizing shit will never be fair and right with whites, and are losing their faith in racial equality and harmony. I wonder what happens when a nation's main class gives up on the prospect of peace?

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 19th, 2007, 2:53 pm

'X' wrote: So who really needs to be willing to 'sit-down' and communicate on this issue?
Everyone. You can say that coloured folk want to sit down and talk and I'm sure you're correct. Likewise there's white folks out there that want to sit down and talk too. There's white people who don't want to hear a thing, and likewise you have coloured folk that don't want to talk either. I think "hair brained" ideas like this "new country" ideal are just that. Trying to take something by force or trying to divide for the sake of division will result in further wedging the people apart. If that's your goal and that's truely what you believe is required for peace then so be it. I don't want to believe that that's what's best. I want to believe that people can come to understanding and peace with communication.

Now if you're saying that there are more coloured people out there in America willing to sit down and talk and listen then there are white people then fine. I'll bite and say you're right because frankly I don't see the sense in arguing over something like that because I don't think anyone can prove one way or the other whether that's true or not. My whole point is that to A: start up a brand new country isn't as easy as it may seem and like a country produced on violence and division (IE: USA) comes great struggle in the form of stuff like slavery, and civil war, and inner turmoil and B: I really believe communication is a much better path to peace then cutting all ties and dividing people further.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 19th, 2007, 6:34 pm

EmperorPenguin wrote:
'X' wrote: So who really needs to be willing to 'sit-down' and communicate on this issue?
Everyone. You can say that coloured folk want to sit down and talk and I'm sure you're correct. Likewise there's white folks out there that want to sit down and talk too. There's white people who don't want to hear a thing, and likewise you have coloured folk that don't want to talk either. I think "hair brained" ideas like this "new country" ideal are just that. Trying to take something by force or trying to divide for the sake of division will result in further wedging the people apart. If that's your goal and that's truely what you believe is required for peace then so be it. I don't want to believe that that's what's best. I want to believe that people can come to understanding and peace with communication.

Now if you're saying that there are more coloured people out there in America willing to sit down and talk and listen then there are white people then fine. I'll bite and say you're right because frankly I don't see the sense in arguing over something like that because I don't think anyone can prove one way or the other whether that's true or not. My whole point is that to A: start up a brand new country isn't as easy as it may seem and like a country produced on violence and division (IE: USA) comes great struggle in the form of stuff like slavery, and civil war, and inner turmoil and B: I really believe communication is a much better path to peace then cutting all ties and dividing people further.
I dont know if they've done test on the percentage of colored peeps who want to talk it out and the percentage of whites who want to talk it out, but they have done test on the percentage of coloreds who say they want to leave in a mixed society, and whites who want to live in a mixed society. I'm going to try to find the test and the results.

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 19th, 2007, 7:18 pm

perongregory wrote:
EmperorPenguin wrote:
'X' wrote: So who really needs to be willing to 'sit-down' and communicate on this issue?
Everyone. You can say that coloured folk want to sit down and talk and I'm sure you're correct. Likewise there's white folks out there that want to sit down and talk too. There's white people who don't want to hear a thing, and likewise you have coloured folk that don't want to talk either. I think "hair brained" ideas like this "new country" ideal are just that. Trying to take something by force or trying to divide for the sake of division will result in further wedging the people apart. If that's your goal and that's truely what you believe is required for peace then so be it. I don't want to believe that that's what's best. I want to believe that people can come to understanding and peace with communication.

Now if you're saying that there are more coloured people out there in America willing to sit down and talk and listen then there are white people then fine. I'll bite and say you're right because frankly I don't see the sense in arguing over something like that because I don't think anyone can prove one way or the other whether that's true or not. My whole point is that to A: start up a brand new country isn't as easy as it may seem and like a country produced on violence and division (IE: USA) comes great struggle in the form of stuff like slavery, and civil war, and inner turmoil and B: I really believe communication is a much better path to peace then cutting all ties and dividing people further.
I dont know if they've done test on the percentage of colored peeps who want to talk it out and the percentage of whites who want to talk it out, but they have done test on the percentage of coloreds who say they want to leave in a mixed society, and whites who want to live in a mixed society. I'm going to try to find the test and the results.
I'm always weery of statistical data to an extent. I don't know because I honestly haven't talked to a large portion of americans. I know personally up here I don't think a lot of people would give it a second thought if you asked them "would you prefer to live in a mixed society" come to think of it most people would probably laugh at that question because the answer is obvious. We already do and not many people think it's a problem or would want it any other way. If a large portion of white Americas don't want to live in a mixed society then I feel for you guys, I really do because that is just a messed up situation.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 19th, 2007, 9:29 pm

Massey and Denton's groundbreaking study demonstrated that the vast majority of whites, compared to the 70's, say they have no problems with living with blacks, but when asked would they support laws and such that would combat segregation and racism in the real estate and spatial grouping of people, the support went to under 50%. Why is this? You can say one thing and do the other, which has been the mo of this country from the beginning.

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » July 19th, 2007, 9:42 pm

what kind of laws?

and with the real estate issue, not that i personally give two shits who lives next door to me, many people have a horrible perception of black people. the worst urban areas are predominantly black neighborhoods, and some people think their neighborhoods will go down hill once black people do come in. which is actually the story of black culture in general, the criminals do their crimes and make a bad reputation, and the honest, working, middle class pays.

Str8UpMenace
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 118
Joined: March 2nd, 2005, 6:02 pm

Unread post by Str8UpMenace » July 19th, 2007, 10:59 pm

EmperorPenguin wrote:I'm going to entertain your hair brained idea for a minute. Ask yourself these questions when it comes to making your own country. Where would you get energy from? You just take whats there, like the US would just hand over the power plants and water treatment plants? Not likely, so you have to either A: Get that energy from someone else (IE: US) or make it yourself which means getting the raw materials from someone else (IE: US). So you just split from the states and you took a couple states with you, and now you want the US to just give you or trade you material. Oh wait, you need something to trade with, like currency. OH WAIT! You don't HAVE a currency. Now you need to either use American currency or make your own. You know how nearly impossible it would be to make your own currency and have other countries of the world accept it? So now you want to use American materials AND American currency from a country you just finished leaving. Good luck with that. So what happens to the current inhabitants of those states? How about a goverment infrastructure? Roadways? Foreign relations? Oh, and who gets citizenship in this country? Only black people? Which black people? 100% African, 50%? 25%? How do you determine that? Now are you getting the picture as to why this idea never took off in the first place. America won't just hand over chunks of land for anyone to make a country with, not even Alaska. This new country you're dreaming of would be on par with Cuba in relation to America except you'd be literally connected to America. It would never work.

I love your analogy of this new country like America was to the British. First off America was pretty far removed from Britian geographically. Making a couple wars feasable to win, with Britian having to replenish it's army from thousands of miles away. Secondly look how great off America is doing now! Couldn't have worked out better for them, No? Then you take their brother from the North who never had to fight off Britian or France to become independent and live in relative peace. Heaven forbid you try that, trying to solve the countries internal problems and make peace. No no, let's just start more wars within and divide your nation even more.

Forgive me if this post comes off a bit synical. All sides of the race conflict have to sit down and communicate to solve this, not MORE fighting and dividing.
I think when making a whole new country these kind of issues are one of the first things that are sorted out and yes it sometimes doesn't turn out the way u wanted it to be but it eventually grows into what it was suppose to be because a seed doesn't bloom into a tree overnight but it takes time and a baby doesn't turn into a man in a day it takes time, and a country doesn't turn into a fully fuctional country overnight but it takes time. In fact no country in the world or a empire or even a super power didn't start out as a picture perfect country but eventually it grew into what they were dreamt to be.

on your suggestion that we should all sit down and talk it out? what does talking it out really solve? make rules and regulations that are meant to be broken in which you would need a another sit down then a another one when they are broken again and again and it would keep on going and going with out a real solution to the problem so talking it out never really solves anything especially in this kind of situation.

Your right this might lead to more wars and divisions but as a man once quoted " i'd rather die on my own feet then to live on my knees" and on their knees black people having been living on for 3 or 4 hundred years in america and its time they finally stood up to whatever end.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 20th, 2007, 12:27 am

se11 wrote:what kind of laws?

and with the real estate issue, not that i personally give two shits who lives next door to me, many people have a horrible perception of black people. the worst urban areas are predominantly black neighborhoods, and some people think their neighborhoods will go down hill once black people do come in. which is actually the story of black culture in general, the criminals do their crimes and make a bad reputation, and the honest, working, middle class pays.
preventions like not requiring a persons race when they are looking into real estate, the government creating a more effective federalized department to fight against racial discrimination etc.


Some interesting articles based on Massey and Denton's groundbreaking examination of the residential segregation that affects America, particularly blacks.


We Are All Multiculturalists Now

by Nathan Glazer (1997)

A _ measure which shows a unique degree of separation, ..., is the residential concentration of blacks. The facts have been developed most starkly and presented most effectively by Douglas Massey and Nancy Denton in American Apartheid. Thirty years after the civil rights revolution and the revolutionary change in the legal posture affecting discrimination, the situation can only be described as extremely depressing. The authors develop measures of both "segregation" and "isolation, " calculated on different bases and reflecting somewhat different realities, but the picture for both indices reflects so high a degree of separation that it is hardly necessary to go into the details.
Comparing 1970 and 1980, they write: "Among the oldest and largest northern ghettoes . . . there was virtually no sign of progress in residential integration. ...

All the more benign explanations of this remarkable stability of racial segregation collapse on investigation. ..., Is this the same pattern we find for other nonwhite groups; is it a general "minority" pattern ? ... , it is not: "The high level of segregation experienced by blacks today is unique compared with the experience of other large minority groups, such as Hispanics and Asians." Black residential isolation is as out of line compared with Asian or Hispanic patterns ...

Is this only a central city pattern, and can we expect its mitigation as more blacks move into suburbs? ... Insofar as suburbanization has increased, much of it has been into suburban areas that are in effect extensions of central-city black areas, or into suburbs that have become dominantly black. ...

Is this pattern mitigated for blacks of higher income? Not at all. Segregation is as severe for those with incomes above $50,000 as for those below.

Is it the effect of black desires, black tastes? Do blacks prefer to live in black areas? Not really. Blacks have been asked in public opinion surveys what kind of neighborhood they would prefer to live in: "By large majorities, blacks support the ideal of integration and express a preference for integrated living and 95% are willing to live in neighborhoods that are anywhere between 15% and 70% black."

But here we do have a problem in the interaction between black desires as to the level of integration blacks would find comfortable or prefer and the level whites would find comfortable or prefer. Massey and Denton report that many surveys show that "blacks strongly prefer a 50-50 mixture, and that whites have little tolerance for racial mixture beyond 20% black."


Where We Live, in Black and White

December 14, 1998 - The Nation. - 25

Despite impressions to the contrary, in America today blacks and whites continue to live in separate neighborhoods, and residential segregation remains a powerful force undermining the well-being of African-Americans. Stephan and Abigail Thernstrom, among others, are only technically correct when they argue that racial segregation is now declining in urban America: This statement is only true on average. Most of the declines have occurred in small metropolitan areas with tiny black populations, while segregation levels are not receding in those places where most blacks live. And even though black suburbanization has mushroomed in recent years, the races are still highly segregated within suburbs.

Although most white Americans now endorse open housing in principle, they remain reluctant to share neighborhoods with a high number of black residents. In metropolitan areas where blacks constitute a small share of the total population, they don't have to. For example, if blacks constitute 5 percent of the overall population, complete desegregation can occur and each neighborhood will be only 5 percent black. On the other hand, in urban areas that are 20 percent black, desegregation will produce neighborhoods that are also, on average, 20 percent black something most whites still won't tolerate.

This is why black-white segregation levels have fallen markedly in such heavily white cities as Albuquerque, Tucson and Phoenix, while they have remained high in Cincinnati, Detroit, Gary, New York, Newark and Philadelphia, with only marginal changes in Buffalo, Chicago, Cleveland, Indianapolis, Milwaukee, Pittsburgh and St. Louis. In twenty metropolitan areas that together house 36 percent of all African-Americans, racial segregation is so profound and pervades so many dimensions of life that sociologist Nancy Denton and one of us (Massey) coined the term "hypersegregation" to describe it. In no metropolitan area have Europeans, Latinos or Asians ever experienced hypersegregation. Whereas 90-100 percent of Asians, whites and Latinos experience no more than moderate segregation, threequarters of African- Americans are highly segregated.

The rising income inequality and growing class segregation of the past two decades have produced a concentration of poverty in certain geographical areas. Extreme segregation has compounded this process for African-Americans. In a recent study we concluded that, given the same unfavorable economic trends, intense segregation yields a concentration of poverty that is 27 percent greater than it would be under complete integration. The result has been a spatial concentration of black poverty far more severe than that of poor Asians, whites or Latinos.

The quality of life in white neighborhoods has not changed much over the years; for Latinos and Asians, it has worsened somewhat; but the neighborhoods of African-Americans, particularly poor African-Americans, have deteriorated markedly. And residential segregation is the key factor distinguishing African-Americans from all other groups in the United States.

The evidence strongly suggests that segregation persists because of ongoing racial discrimination in the real estate and banking industries, the persistence of white prejudice against black neighbors and the discriminately impact of public policies. As a consequence, black ghettos have come to contain a disproportionate share of the nation's poor, creating an intensely disadvantaged environment that only blacks face. The key issue, in the end is not whether it is race or class that explains the plight of African-Americans in the late twentieth century but how race and class interact to produce barriers to black socioeconomic progress that are unique in their intensity, severity and durability.

black
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 713
Joined: November 16th, 2005, 6:49 am
Location: "It is the racist who creates the inferior." fanon.

Unread post by black » July 20th, 2007, 8:14 am

'X' wrote:This is a good idea in a fantasy world. But this will never happen. A certain mindset would have to be permantly be destroyed for the above to happen. And since that mindset keeps getting passed on to the masses of a certain people, how can it ever stop?
Real shit, that metantality has to die and the truth has to be told. if it's not peace amongst Iu-man's is not going to happen. so until truth is told and social change comes i'm for segregation.

black
Middle Weight
Middle Weight
Posts: 713
Joined: November 16th, 2005, 6:49 am
Location: "It is the racist who creates the inferior." fanon.

Unread post by black » July 20th, 2007, 8:31 am

perongregory wrote:They might not like us but there is too much to exploit and gain from us to just let us go without a fight.
real shit, that's why the be destroying shit.

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 20th, 2007, 8:33 am

Str8UpMenace wrote:
EmperorPenguin wrote:I'm going to entertain your hair brained idea for a minute. Ask yourself these questions when it comes to making your own country. Where would you get energy from? You just take whats there, like the US would just hand over the power plants and water treatment plants? Not likely, so you have to either A: Get that energy from someone else (IE: US) or make it yourself which means getting the raw materials from someone else (IE: US). So you just split from the states and you took a couple states with you, and now you want the US to just give you or trade you material. Oh wait, you need something to trade with, like currency. OH WAIT! You don't HAVE a currency. Now you need to either use American currency or make your own. You know how nearly impossible it would be to make your own currency and have other countries of the world accept it? So now you want to use American materials AND American currency from a country you just finished leaving. Good luck with that. So what happens to the current inhabitants of those states? How about a goverment infrastructure? Roadways? Foreign relations? Oh, and who gets citizenship in this country? Only black people? Which black people? 100% African, 50%? 25%? How do you determine that? Now are you getting the picture as to why this idea never took off in the first place. America won't just hand over chunks of land for anyone to make a country with, not even Alaska. This new country you're dreaming of would be on par with Cuba in relation to America except you'd be literally connected to America. It would never work.

I love your analogy of this new country like America was to the British. First off America was pretty far removed from Britian geographically. Making a couple wars feasable to win, with Britian having to replenish it's army from thousands of miles away. Secondly look how great off America is doing now! Couldn't have worked out better for them, No? Then you take their brother from the North who never had to fight off Britian or France to become independent and live in relative peace. Heaven forbid you try that, trying to solve the countries internal problems and make peace. No no, let's just start more wars within and divide your nation even more.

Forgive me if this post comes off a bit synical. All sides of the race conflict have to sit down and communicate to solve this, not MORE fighting and dividing.
I think when making a whole new country these kind of issues are one of the first things that are sorted out and yes it sometimes doesn't turn out the way u wanted it to be but it eventually grows into what it was suppose to be because a seed doesn't bloom into a tree overnight but it takes time and a baby doesn't turn into a man in a day it takes time, and a country doesn't turn into a fully fuctional country overnight but it takes time. In fact no country in the world or a empire or even a super power didn't start out as a picture perfect country but eventually it grew into what they were dreamt to be.

on your suggestion that we should all sit down and talk it out? what does talking it out really solve? make rules and regulations that are meant to be broken in which you would need a another sit down then a another one when they are broken again and again and it would keep on going and going with out a real solution to the problem so talking it out never really solves anything especially in this kind of situation.

Your right this might lead to more wars and divisions but as a man once quoted " i'd rather die on my own feet then to live on my knees" and on their knees black people having been living on for 3 or 4 hundred years in america and its time they finally stood up to whatever end.
So the african american people of this country having gone thru all the hardship they already have for 400 years are to now turn around and start all over again? I can't imagine too many people going for that, not to mention that this new country would further divide races in America so the tension would be an all time high, you would be literally setting back civil rights movements a couple hundred years. I understand your motive for this, but I don't think you understand what may more then likely be in store as far as struggling to start this new country goes.

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » July 20th, 2007, 10:14 am

^^ good post.

User avatar
'X'
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 3127
Joined: May 31st, 2004, 10:36 am
Country: Hong Kong, China
If in the United States: North Dakota
What city do you live in now?: ........

Unread post by 'X' » July 20th, 2007, 12:18 pm

EmperorPenguin wrote:
So the african american people of this country having gone thru all the hardship they already have for 400 years are to now turn around and start all over again? I can't imagine too many people going for that
I personally wouldn't mind trying. I mean how much worse could it be from what we experience now...
EmperorPenguin wrote: not to mention that this new country would further divide races in America so the tension would be an all time high
"Further divide"? Where do you live again? How much more could america be divided on race? And can the 'racial tension' get any worse than it is/has been?

se11
Heavy Weight
Heavy Weight
Posts: 2247
Joined: October 12th, 2004, 9:48 pm
Location: NYC

Unread post by se11 » July 20th, 2007, 1:25 pm

I personally wouldn't mind trying. I mean how much worse could it be from what we experience now...
proof your an idiot. first of all, not ever black person would be down to isolate themselvs from every other community within the country, and the ones that do are probably pissed off guys like yourself. so after all the pissed off black people have made their own country, what do they do? they have no natural resources to do international business, because i dont think the USA is just going to say "here take our oil fields in texas", so what are they going to do? where are they going to start an economy? build cities, buildings, schools, get qualified teachers, ect.? all the cars they buy will have an international import tax on them. this isn't just a situation where "i dont liek this, i can do better on my own", because there is a lot more to it, but your too stupid to see that. unless you want to live in the countryside, farming, in a little "campo" like they do in DR and less prosperous countries, this is a retarded idea.
"Further divide"? Where do you live again? How much more could america be divided on race? And can the 'racial tension' get any worse than it is/has been?
yea we could be much futher divided. we can have a white toilet and a black toilet like we had 40 years ago. white beaches, black beaches, i think thats more divided than we are now. and in all honesty, besides extereme assholes like you, nazis, and other hate groups, the racial tension isn't that bad.

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 20th, 2007, 1:27 pm

'X' wrote:
EmperorPenguin wrote:
So the african american people of this country having gone thru all the hardship they already have for 400 years are to now turn around and start all over again? I can't imagine too many people going for that
I personally wouldn't mind trying. I mean how much worse could it be from what we experience now...
And if it is worse? What then? You want to go back to the states? You'd be considered an immigrant and have to go thru that process, that is if this new country is on good terms with America.
'X' wrote:
EmperorPenguin wrote: not to mention that this new country would further divide races in America so the tension would be an all time high
"Further divide"? Where do you live again? How much more could america be divided on race? And can the 'racial tension' get any worse than it is/has been?
Because breaking off from the States would almost certainly have to be done by force. No goverment official is going to stick their necks out and say "Hey this is a great idea, let's give them Florida." You'd be drawing battle lines. And who is a part of this new country? I'd love to hear what qualifies as a new citizen of this country because once you do that, you further divide people and force who can and can't be apart of the country.

The only arguement I've heard for this is to say more or less you don't like the current situation in America so let's give it a go. That's all fine and good but (and I'm not expecting a blueprint for success here) I'd just to hear a few ideas as to how this would actually work outside of pipe-dreams.

MiChuhSuh

Unread post by MiChuhSuh » July 20th, 2007, 1:37 pm

'X' wrote:"Further divide"? Where do you live again? How much more could america be divided on race? And can the 'racial tension' get any worse than it is/has been?
And where do you live again?

Image
Gaaarrrrrrrrrr, I say it could get faaaarrrrrrrrr worse

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 20th, 2007, 1:38 pm

Probably another Israel move is not taht bad of an idea. The Jews say never again so what's wrong with blacks saying it and acting on it? That's all I want to know, how come other people can do it and it's cool but if blacks want to they are angry, racist and fucked up, I'm just trying to grasp the duality in your characters.

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 20th, 2007, 1:40 pm

Just so I can distance myself from se11 here for a minute, I honestly would love to hear some serious discussion as to how this would go about. I'm not trying to seriously insult anyone but I have had discussions like this in the past being that Quebec (almost entirely francophone Canadians) wanted to leave Canada a number of years ago to the point it came down to 51% of Quebec against and 49% for leaving Canada. SOOOO many people had such wonderful thoughts of how great a french country would be smack dab in the middle of Canada but I never once heard a single person say "Here's how I think it would happen". Even the Quebec politicians were on some sort of "Oh well we'll use Canadian currency, and use energy from Ontario and we'll use the Canadian military to start out" and that single handedly alienated Quebec from almost all of Western Canada because no one was liking that idea and it's never really been the same since.

It just seems like it's a real recipe for division. You don't just walk away from a country and take a portion of it with you and hope that relations will some how be better. You know, maybe 40,50, or 100 years from now that country would be well off and the relations between it and America will be ok, and maybe some people would be willing to make that sacrifice to give it a go, I just think you'd be pretty surprised if this notion was serious enough to be put before a goverment and how many people wouldn't be willing to make that same sacrifice.

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 20th, 2007, 1:44 pm

perongregory wrote:Probably another Israel move is not taht bad of an idea. The Jews say never again so what's wrong with blacks saying it and acting on it? That's all I want to know, how come other people can do it and it's cool but if blacks want to they are angry, racist and #%@& up, I'm just trying to grasp the duality in your characters.
I don't think it's racist, and I don't think I ever made that comparison. If it's something that they truely want to do then so be it, but if you want to compare it to Israel look at how well they get along with their new neighbors. I think there's far more Cons then Pros in this plan.

MiChuhSuh

Unread post by MiChuhSuh » July 20th, 2007, 1:45 pm

perongregory wrote:Probably another Israel move is not taht bad of an idea. The Jews say never again so what's wrong with blacks saying it and acting on it? That's all I want to know, how come other people can do it and it's cool but if blacks want to they are angry, racist and #%@& up, I'm just trying to grasp the duality in your characters.
This isn't even close to comparable. The whole "Israel" thing was manhandled by Ashkenazim and some Sephardi from Europe who moved into the Middle East, even dominating the Hebrew Jews who were already living in the land.

So the closest comparison to your analogy is saying have all the American blacks move to Africa and dominate the blacks already living there. Didn't they try that already? Isn't your mom Liberian?

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 20th, 2007, 1:52 pm

MiChuhSuh wrote:
perongregory wrote:Probably another Israel move is not taht bad of an idea. The Jews say never again so what's wrong with blacks saying it and acting on it? That's all I want to know, how come other people can do it and it's cool but if blacks want to they are angry, racist and #%@& up, I'm just trying to grasp the duality in your characters.
This isn't even close to comparable. The whole "Israel" thing was manhandled by Ashkenazim and some Sephardi from Europe who moved into the Middle East, even dominating the Hebrew Jews who were already living in the land.

So the closest comparison to your analogy is saying have all the American blacks move to Africa and dominate the blacks already living there. Didn't they try that already? Isn't your mom Liberian?
the American gov. set that up (Liberia)- and later on helped destroy the country with the CIA'sinvolvement in the Assasination of Liberias last sane president- just like the British helped with Israel. That's mainly what I was trying to get at, what is the big difference in America or some foregin force helping blacks procure some land? We live with Israel's illegal occupation and say they needed a home land, we live with America's and Canada's illegal occupation and say this is our homeland, so why won't we be able to live with a part of the country given to a group that America still considers the dregs of society?

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 20th, 2007, 2:55 pm

perongregory wrote:
MiChuhSuh wrote:
perongregory wrote:Probably another Israel move is not taht bad of an idea. The Jews say never again so what's wrong with blacks saying it and acting on it? That's all I want to know, how come other people can do it and it's cool but if blacks want to they are angry, racist and #%@& up, I'm just trying to grasp the duality in your characters.
This isn't even close to comparable. The whole "Israel" thing was manhandled by Ashkenazim and some Sephardi from Europe who moved into the Middle East, even dominating the Hebrew Jews who were already living in the land.

So the closest comparison to your analogy is saying have all the American blacks move to Africa and dominate the blacks already living there. Didn't they try that already? Isn't your mom Liberian?
the American gov. set that up (Liberia)- and later on helped destroy the country with the CIA'sinvolvement in the Assasination of Liberias last sane president- just like the British helped with Israel. That's mainly what I was trying to get at, what is the big difference in America or some foregin force helping blacks procure some land? We live with Israel's illegal occupation and say they needed a home land, we live with America's and Canada's illegal occupation and say this is our homeland, so why won't we be able to live with a part of the country given to a group that America still considers the dregs of society?
I'd still like to know if this plan is to take an area by force (not likely going to happen) or by a political procedure ( totally not going to happen either) and which area would this be specifically? Personally if I had to pick somewhere it'd have to be either Hawaii or Alaska, somewhere that's not sharing a border with mainland America to avoid a direct physical conflict.

perongregory
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 5147
Joined: February 12th, 2004, 9:17 pm
Location: Los Angeles

Unread post by perongregory » July 20th, 2007, 3:04 pm

I would go with political procedure, which I also agree wouldn't happen...I would rather see an end to the hypersegregation blacks face around the country even in this post civil rights era, but I dont think that will ever happen either. But i like to hear about this cuz there is action in it, not BS like we need to talk when most people don't want to talk, dont really see a problem, cant see the problem, or forcefully ignore the problems caused by forced hypersegregation in a multicultural nation.

MiChuhSuh

Unread post by MiChuhSuh » July 20th, 2007, 3:05 pm

damn Canadians know nothing about the US lol
seriously though, you want the native Hawaiians to get f*cked over TWICE?

MiChuhSuh

Unread post by MiChuhSuh » July 20th, 2007, 3:06 pm

And the Inuits in Alaska?
There's gonna be a massive "immigration/refugee" situation in Western Canada for you!

User avatar
'X'
Super Heavy Weight
Super Heavy Weight
Posts: 3127
Joined: May 31st, 2004, 10:36 am
Country: Hong Kong, China
If in the United States: North Dakota
What city do you live in now?: ........

Unread post by 'X' » July 20th, 2007, 3:33 pm

EmperorPenguin wrote: You don't just walk away from a country and take a portion of it with you and hope that relations will some how be better.

What I dont get is that "take a portion" statement. Just give us what was originally ours and we should be cool.



I dont see whats so hard about understanding that for over 400 years there has been no complete freedom, justice, and equality for people of color in america. Our people have died striving for this. It's not in a perticular group of people as a whole to change their ways. It has been proven that Black folk has been willing(and dumb) to be with peace with white folk. We are not the obstacle to the peace process....

EmperorPenguin
Light Heavy Weight
Light Heavy Weight
Posts: 1155
Joined: February 21st, 2006, 3:01 am

Unread post by EmperorPenguin » July 20th, 2007, 5:03 pm

MiChuhSuh wrote:And the Inuits in Alaska?
There's gonna be a massive "immigration/refugee" situation in Western Canada for you!
I said Hawaii and Alaska as a means to get some discussion on this fancy new country that people want. I don't seriously think Alaska or Hawaii should be handed over, I gave those as examples because physically speaking neither one touches American mainland soil and I think strategically that's important if there is mass tension between America and this new country.

Post Reply

Return to “Race and Ethnicity, Racial Relations & Racism”