That's more the fault of the person who told you that. Society at large is fine with "Black", "White", "Asian", whatever, with specifics being something you should only go into if you know for a fact the specifics of the person. I'd hate if someone called me Italian American just because I'm white, being that I am in fact Scotch-Irish.

-Furthermore, I personally believe "African American" and other "-American" appelations should be reserved for immigrants and their children, since after two generations you're pretty firmly American.

Does that include the slaves that were born 200+ years after their ancestors were enslaved or just "blacks" that were born a fewer number of years after their "free" ancestors were forced in to indentured servitude? Jim Crowe came to an end only 14 years before I was born. My parents were around to witness desegregation. I myself was bussed. All of these things are relatively recent in the scheme of human history. I suspect that there are still a lot of blacks around that feel more African than American.

Indeed, it's quite interesting that some (mostly white) folks try to tow the line of "Black folks should get over it, desegregation happened!" and of course completley ignore the fact that it only ended in the 1960s!

These are the same folks who cherry pick the things that MLK said, and ignore his opposition to economic inequality and anti-war positions.

I think it's ok to 'cherry pick' from among someone's multiple beliefs, as long as by saying "I like that he said Point A" you're not misrepresenting his beliefs about Point B.

i generally don't really care if someone refers to themselves as "fill in the blank" American. especially if its to help preserve their heritage and culture. it is a little frustrating though when it is used as just one more layer of separation that adds to the "us" and "them" mentality.

but then i guess i wouldn't understand these things because im white huh!? :downs:


Personally i think he was a great man with an amazing ability to enact change. does not mean i have to hang on every idea he ever had. and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that.
admittedly i probably should do some further reading into what his ideas on economic inequality were.

Dude, some of my best friends with benefits are black

My statement has nothing to do with slavery and desegregation, nor even with race, specifically. My complaint is with the idea that everyone who lives in America has to have a neat little label based on what country their great grand parents emigrated from. And of course it's always just one country, because god forbid the mixing of the races, or worse, the nationalities take place in an enormous ethnically diverse country over the course of a hundred years.

-But seriously, what are we talking about? Ron Paul? I don't much care for him.

for the past several years I've been mailing all my feces to Ralph Nader. Every time I defecate, I do so in a zip lock bag, which I then send to Ralph Nader's home address via USPS priority mail. Though I always clearly write my name and address on the return portion of the envelope, I have never recieved a reply, nor have any of my mailings been refused :|

That's weird. For the last several years, Ralph Nader has been forwarding me bags of feces via USPS... I never realized who this "Alan Sullivan" was that originally mailed them.

Remember how Ron Paul is undetectable?

That's weird. I keep mailing Ralph Nader your forum posts and he always sends them back.

this thread suddenly turned awesome.

Ralph Nader owns stop mailing him your ****

Ron Paul lost this thread

The irony being that slavery still continues in Africa today.

Many things have helped to reduce the slavery in Africa, including the 1820 US Law on Slave Trade which made slave trading piracy and punishable by death and the British 1833 Slavery Abolition Act. The bottom line is, regardless of the hardships of deslavery in the United States and Europe, if it weren't for the "White Man" most blacks would likely still be in slavery today. Which should blacks be more proud of?

It's sad to see that the "White Man's Burden" ideology is still alive and well with historical narratives like this. The idea that the US and the UK, the two countries who helped promote the triangle trade of slaves for so long, can be painted as anti-slavery crusaders ought to be appalling to even the most elementary understanding of the history of European/American-African relations.

It's sad to see that blame for the existence of African slavery is wrongly placed. Again, slavery existed in Africa before the US and Europe and still exists today. Did the US and Europe utilize slavery to their advantage? Absolutely. Is slavery wrong? Yes, but hindsight is always 20/20. At the time, slavery wasn't considered to be wrong, especially by the African tribal leaders of the time! So, back to my original point, why would any "black" of slavery decent in the US or Europe be proud of their African origins? Proud of the African Tribal leaders who enslaved them.

The bottom line, as others have said, regardless how your descendants arrived or where they are from, if you were born in the US, you are an American and not InsertCountry-American. I, myself, am the epidemy of the American melting pot. Descended from the mixed relationships between Native Americans, Germans, British, and yes a freed African Slave. I come from a family of very mixed and diverse cultures. While we respect and celebrate our diverse cultural background, we are proud to be Americans and do not associate ourselves with any other country. I am specifically concerned about the use of the title "African-American" as it continues to create divisions between "Whites" and "Blacks". Racism will continue to exist as long as we "pride" ourselves on our differences instead of what we have in common. I'm not suggesting we forget where our heritage came from, but it should be a private matter and not something that we flaunt around.

Remember how Ron Paul is delectable?

The issue here isn't whether there was slavery in Africa before Europeans arrived, but rather is your narrative of European/Americans being champions in the fight against slavery: which is quite absurd.



I fully disagree with this. The idea that being an American automatically makes everyone who is an American "equal" because it's a melting pot simply doesn't follow, especially considering the white supremacist history of the US and that legacy that continues well into the present.

Your conception of race is very ideological and moralistic and ignores the realities of oppression that continue. For example, how does your view of "we should just ignore our differences and stop flaunting identities" account for the racialized disparities in unemployment, income, incarceration, etc?

Guys I almost forgot about how Ron Paul is unelectable, but luckily this thread got bumped and it all came back to me.

I don't see how that's "ironic".

I totally disagree with you about blacks possibly still being slaves today if it weren't for the white man. I think that you're overlooking the possibility that blacks were eventually going to take their "freedom" if it wasn't given to them & that said possibility had something to do with why it was given (see American history). There were several slave uprisings that scared the merde (pardon my French) out of slave owners (this is partly why blacks were punished so harshly--a deterrent). Blacks outnumbered whites in so many areas of the South that even the white children probably slept with guns.

It's true that many white Christians & a growing number of white Communists saw racism as an important issue & that they were a part of the Civil Rights Movement in the 50's & 60's but let's not pretend that it was anything more than a matter of time before the blacks demanded their freedom (some did) through the barrel of a gun.

I really think that you'd benefit from reading A People's History of the United States (it'll give you a better appreciation for what the blacks did to obtain their freedom).

I don't think it's any secret that there are portions of the united states still dominated by racism. On the other hand, there are places where it's much the opposite. I think some people are still trapped in the mindset that everybody who's white is rich and powerful, and everybody who's black is poor and downtrodden, when the fact of the matter is that this is no longer the socio-economic reality we live in. It doesn't matter what color the man foreclosing on your home is, he's not doing it because you're black or white, he's doing it because he has money and you don't.
It's like I always tell my boyfriend, yes he gets treated crappy because he's black, but he also gets treated crappy because he lives in South Carolina. If he moved up here with me, he might have a different experience. Admittedly, that's a bit of a coward's solution, if the going gets tough the tough get going, but in many places in this country, the great divide isn't between black and white but between rich and poor. We're both americans, it doesn't matter where our great grandfathers came from, or how our grandfathers treated each other, or where our fathers went to school.

-(Though, for the record, nobody in my family ever owned slaves, my grandfather worked with and enjoyed the company of black and jewish people, and my father was a native american orphan and veteran who was treated like **** by the government).

I think they really need to do a better job teaching about this stuff in history classes. That's one thing I hated about history in high school and even lower level college history. They just teach you a list of dates. Not that dates are not important, but they don't teach jack crap about what happened on said dates!!! And good god I apologize, I've had to much to drink to continue this post!

Well, yes and no. It's true that in most parts of America that aren't South Carolina (and to be fair, also some parts of South Carolina), serious, open expressions of racism are considered absolutely socially unacceptable. But even in those parts of the country, at any given income level, you're better off being white than black. The white poor tend to have better chances for social mobility; they're more likely to have the family contacts they need, and even if they don't, they have the not insubstantial benefit of looking like the people whose assistance they need to improve their lives.

Because I was responding to Bguitar's comment of "I suspect that there are still a lot of blacks around that feel more African than American."



I was referring to African Slavery. I was making the point that had things not played out the way they did, if Europe and the US had not got involved in the African slave trade, then most blacks would probably still be slaves today in Africa instead of free in Europe and the US. Besides, your argument that blacks would have demanded their freedom through a barrel of a gun really doesn't hold water since slavery still exists in several parts of Africa today.



Um, exactly what oppressions continue today against blacks? I might accept that argument about Hispanics, but not blacks.

As for "racialized disparities in unemployment, income, etc". This comes down to a statistics issue. The statistics, themselves, are racialized. To suggest that the equal opportunity isn't there for blacks as it is for whites is ridiculous. If it was still the 1980's, you might have a leg to stand on with this argument, but this is no longer the case. There are a lot of cultural influences in the black community that have a negative impact on the individual upward mobility potential. Unfortunately this is something that has to be resolved within the black community and there are a number of black celebrities who are attempting to do just that.

There was a white supremacy movement at one time, but it has been dying since the early 90's. What remains is largely a bunch of white haired men who have very little influence (if any).

...Now that we're way off my original point of irony.

I know you were referring to African slavery. Your counter-factual makes absolutely no sense though. European and American involvement in slave trade was to acquire slaves. The ending of slavery was the result of mass struggles within those respective countries against that system of oppression, it was not handed to them from on top.

And your argument here simply doesn't follow. How does the continued existence of slavery (which by the way is much different than the African slave trade of the era you are referring to) contradict the demanding of its end via the barrel of a gun? Comments like that seem to be based on an ignorance of struggles against European and American dominance of Africa.





Wow, it's quite sad that people still believe this stuff. Our entire justice system is lined up against people of color in general, blacks are punished at much higher rates for the same crimes. The judicial/prison system is perhaps the best example: where the overwhelming majority of folks incarcerated are black and latino. On top of that fact there is the increasing trend towards the privatization of prisons.

You contradict yourself when you say the statistics are "racialized" but not the reality of the matter. It demonstrates an ignorance of what "unemployment" actually is: which is by definition folks seeking employment and not finding it. To blame it on the "black culture" shows that you know nothing of the continued discrimination in the work place.

The conception that there is equality of opportunity is laughable when you look at any statistic or study on the issue, which you seem to not have.

And white supremacy is not about a movement but a structural system of oppression and privilege. The "overt racist white supremacist movement" is a different kind of thing.

The point, is that you seem to continue to believe that this whole thing is a White vs Black and not the fact that both had members that were responsible for slavery and both had members that were responsible for helping to end it. It was the collective result of the evolving melting pot of cultures that ended slavery. This is the point I'm trying to get through, but obviously failing to do so. Do I have an idealistic viewpoint? Perhaps. The point is to not dwell on what happened in the past, or what you even perceive to be happening today, but to instead work towards a future where the color of your skin or even your country of origin doesn't matter. By living a life with that idealistic mindset, it's not ignorance, it's setting an example for others to follow.

its like whenever you speak all i am able to hear is "evil villain... handle bar mustache... RACISM!!!"

is this your fault or mine? i really cant tell?

I'm extremely liberal, yet I don't mind the government getting involved in our personal lives in order to keep us safe from terrorism. I'm also ok with racial profiling.

We don't need to be 'kept safe from terrorism'. Modern terrorism was created by our government ****ing with things in the first place.

YEAH! its not like there was any hostility between the middle east and the west before!

So because we equipped them means we don't have to defend against that ****?

I don't mind the government getting involved in our lives in order to keep us safe from terrorism. I do mind the government getting involved in our lives "in order to keep us safe from terrorism." The second one is what's actually happening.

Britney Spears once said that she thinks we should just trust the government and always support the President no matter what. If it's good enough for Britney, it's good enough for me.

Britney and I don't hate America like MacFarlane.

I hate America, but I love you, Antony.

Oh, well that's a catch-22, because like Stephen Colbert, I am America and so can you.

I read that, but then it turned out I couldn't America. I was so disappointed.

I never read it because in my America I believe in the freedom to not read anything I don't want to, while pretending to have read it so I can reference the title. This is why I bleed red white and blue, and you're a texas commie dickweed.

the texas commie dickweed

My mistake, your heinous.

Right, Antony, I've been meaning to talk to you about this, this is a serious medical condition and yet you treat it like a game. We need you to come in for further testing, and we also need you to stop patronizing sperm- and blood-banks.

-Also, that's "you're heinous". Unless it was a pun on "your highness", in which case we're in uncharted waters.