Taking things from white people
- Thread starter Anti Federalist
- Start date
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,940
Fair enough. I only have authority to negotiate for myself. So in exchange for $1,000 I will promise not to move to whatever county you are in in New Hampshire.
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,701
Only a grand? You're letting me off cheap, especially considering I'd be happy to have you as a neighbor.
This is three hours long, but worth the watch.
Mrs. AF was singing his praises in this interview, until he said, in almost the same words, the same thing I have been saying for years about "collectively" viewing people.
https://x.com/i/status/1801302722664087612
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,940
Only a grand? You're letting me off cheap, especially considering I'd be happy to have you as a neighbor.
No offense, but your winter doesn't look that appealing to me.
I'll listen to it sometime when I have a 3 hour drive by myself. But this begs the question. Isn't this entire thread collectively viewing people? I'm seriously stunned by the genetic trauma argument coming from you as that is the kind of argument I would be expecting from a critical race theorist. If Pat Buchannan endorsed that view that's even more shocking. This reminds me of a song.
As for what really messed up black American, it's one word. Deindustrialization. You probably never watched Set If Off (4 black female lead characters, 1 lesbian), but it's an awesome movie. In this scene at 1:25 in on the clip below, Queen Latifa points to an abandoned factory and says "Before they started laying people off, they were paying people $15.00 an hour. For $15 and hour I'd be an <unintelligible> 'What I gotta do sir' MFer. They'd have to pry may hands off that damn machine." Blacks moved from the agricultural South to the inner city, mostly North, for economic opportunities. Most of those opportunities have moved overseas.
People want a better life. The original gansta rapper "Easy E" of NWA came from a stable two parent home where his dad worked for the post office and his mom worked for the school system. He could have gotten a regular 9 to 5 job. But he wanted more and he saw people making fast money selling crack so he got into it. After his cousin got killed he decided to go and different route, used the money he had saved to hook up with Jerry Heller (white Jew) and formed a record label where he exploited the talent of his homies who wrote lyrics (Ice Cube) and made beats (Dr. Dre) for him to rap over. He made bank until they realized he and Jerry were ripping them off and they one by one went their separate ways. (Ice Cube and Dr. Dre being the most successful after going on their own). At the end of the day it all comes down to economics.
Last edited:
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,701
No offense, but your winter doesn't look that appealing to me.
Well, when we have a real winter, it's not for everybody.
His quote about "genetic fingerprints" is right in my sig line.
For good or bad, people carry their history, their shared experiences, their religion and philosophy and it reaches from generation to generation.
A strong proposition nation, of which the United States is one of the few and most successful in history, can overcome those genetic fingerprints by offering a vision that is stronger and more powerful than those fingerprints. And we did, for many years and generations. But that proposition is now shredded and dead, and the people that should have vigorously defended it, are weak, vacuous or complicit in it's destruction, many of whom I have made it very clear what interests and group they serve.
So does that end up with an observer "collectively" viewing people? Of course. The system calls me Walter White and says I am the danger. No, I am not. That is what I have been proving here.
I agree completely.
The same group I just mentioned has made it a point to utterly blow up the middle class and middle class incomes and the money supply, which fucks up debt, which makes it harder to access credit to start a business and this affect both black and white all the while selling an unobtainable lifestyle that can only be supported by both parents working or crime.
Young men can't take a wife and start a family on intern's or Wal Marx wages and more and more they are blocked out of college by costs or deliberate government policies that exclude them, white and black men, in favor of queeers, invaders or other weirdoes of assorted stripes. So they become shallow, depressed, bitter and hopeless. Once that happens, it's only a short stretch to killing each other in autistic, never ending, street violence in the case of black young men or killing themselves with drugs or giving up and becoming some sort of queeer in the case of young white men. (I can't tell you how many squared away, sharp dressed, young white men I have run across and thought "he should be a dad to five children" only to find out he was a fagggot).
This is why I have come full circle back to Pat Buchanan's manner of political thought, and why I have, and do, and always will support things like tariffs and trade policy and immigration policy that favors American business, manufacturing and the American people first, last and always, regardless of how much blarg, blarg, blarg, anarcho, blarg I hear.
Yes they do.
And like Malcom X and Marcus Garvey, I believe that people do better when they live with people that are roughly the same as themselves.
You wrote in another post that "integration worked".
In light of what has happened to black family and black community in the last 60 years, I'm curious how you can justify that statement.
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,940
Well I have a son who's become acclimatized to Chicago.
Okay. But I thought the point of the 3 hour Tucker interview that I haven't watched yet is that the problem with the Civil Rights Movement is that it got people thinking collectively? I'm seriously confused as to what your position is.
Did you watch the Joe Rogan interview I posted about Sparta? Just curious.
I believe people do better when they have better opportunity. That's the point of my posting the "Set It Off" clip. The problem, as you agree, is America got de-industrialized. Lack of opportunity is a thing in itself. I don't believe if Ford was building an auto plant that had 1,000 jobs in an area where there 500 blacks and 500 whites within driving distance (just making the math easier) it would somehow be "more opportunity" to build 2 plants, one white and one black. That's basically the argument that you're making. I mean, yeah there would be more opportunity from the waste of building two separate plants but you know what I mean. (I hope).
Because ^that has nothing to do with integration. You want to talk about the break up of the family? Talk about the break up of the family IN GENERAL! Much of that can be traced by to good old Ronald Reagan and no fault divorce. Add to that the rise of feminism and you have whole generations of women that either don't get married at all or leave ASAP. My dad used to be on me about "I don't know why you got divorced. I stayed with your mom 55 years." I had to gently explain to my dad that my mom thought about it multiple times but she was from a different generation of women. My maternal grandmother's first husband survived being gassed in France in WW I only to succumb to tuberculosis. Her second husband was a complete jackass and she was going to divorce him but her dad was like "I don't like him either but I just can't see a woman getting rid of her husband." She quite happy to find out he was still married to someone entitling her to an annulment.
Bottom line, you've provided zero linkage between integration and the break up of the black family, or the white family, or any other family group. You can't just say "Two things happened at the same time so they must be related." Correlation does not equal causation.
That said, check out this chart of single parent households by country.
And note that England is 82% white yet it's right behind the U.S. on single parent households. (23% for the U.S. and 21% for the U.K.).
By contrast Brazil which is 45% multiracial (lots of integration there), 43% white, 10% African and the rest indigenous or other only has a 10% single parent household rate.
So....how do you explainthat if integration is the problem?
WarriorLiberty
Member
- Joined
- Oct 4, 2023
- Messages
- 2,411
Well I have a son who's become acclimatized to Chicago.
Okay. But I thought the point of the 3 hour Tucker interview that I haven't watched yet is that the problem with the Civil Rights Movement is that it got people thinking collectively? I'm seriously confused as to what your position is.
Did you watch the Joe Rogan interview I posted about Sparta? Just curious.
I believe people do better when they have better opportunity. That's the point of my posting the "Set It Off" clip. The problem, as you agree, is America got de-industrialized. Lack of opportunity is a thing in itself. I don't believe if Ford was building an auto plant that had 1,000 jobs in an area where there 500 blacks and 500 whites within driving distance (just making the math easier) it would somehow be "more opportunity" to build 2 plants, one white and one black. That's basically the argument that you're making. I mean, yeah there would be more opportunity from the waste of building two separate plants but you know what I mean. (I hope).
Because ^that has nothing to do with integration. You want to talk about the break up of the family? Talk about the break up of the family IN GENERAL! Much of that can be traced by to good old Ronald Reagan and no fault divorce. Add to that the rise of feminism and you have whole generations of women that either don't get married at all or leave ASAP. My dad used to be on me about "I don't know why you got divorced. I stayed with your mom 55 years." I had to gently explain to my dad that my mom thought about it multiple times but she was from a different generation of women. My maternal grandmother's first husband survived being gassed in France in WW I only to succumb to tuberculosis. Her second husband was a complete jackass and she was going to divorce him but her dad was like "I don't like him either but I just can't see a woman getting rid of her husband." She quite happy to find out he was still married to someone entitling her to an annulment.
Bottom line, you've provided zero linkage between integration and the break up of the black family, or the white family, or any other family group. You can't just say "Two things happened at the same time so they must be related." Correlation does not equal causation.
That said, check out this chart of single parent households by country.
And note that England is 82% white yet it's right behind the U.S. on single parent households. (23% for the U.S. and 21% for the U.K.).
By contrast Brazil which is 45% multiracial (lots of integration there), 43% white, 10% African and the rest indigenous or other only has a 10% single parent household rate.
So....how do you explainthat if integration is the problem?
Not London.
It is a problem in Italy, Germany, Spain the majority of the migrants in Italy that recently came had committed crimes and some go unreported.
Are mostly just Africans and a few Arabs.
Last edited:
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,940
I'm talking about specifically regarding the break up of the family. You're welcome to jump into the stream of a conversation but not welcome to change the subject. Please address what's actually being discussed at the moment thank you very much.Edit: And please understand that the words immigration and integration are not the same thing. Consult a dictionary if necessary.
For a further reference see:
https://www.vox.com/2015/3/18/8237299/irish-crime-1850s
Americans can look back to the Irish immigrants of the 1850s to see that criminal justice disparities are very often a symptom of vast socioeconomic disparities, not traits inherent to a certain group of people.
News website Pando cited statistics from the history book Immigrant Life in New York City, 1825–1863 to illustrate the big criminal justice disparities low-income Irish immigrants faced in the 1850s:
55% of those arrested NYC in the 1850s were Irish-born
35% of the prostitutes arrested in NYC in 1858 were Irish-born
70% of all admissions to Bellevue Hospital (NYC’s public hospital) in the 1850s were Irish
85% of foreign-born admissions to Bellevue Hospital (NYC’s public hospital) in the 1850s were Irish
63% of foreign-born admissions to the NYC Alms House (Poor House) 1849-1858 were Irish
56% of all prison NYC Prison commitments in 1858 were Irish-born
74% of foreign-born prison NYC Prison commitments in 1858 were Irish-born
70% of persons convicted of disorderly conduct NYC Courts of Special Sessions, 1859, were Irish-born
74% of persons convicted of drunk and disorderly conduct NYC Courts of Special Sessions, 1859, were Irish-born
It wasn't traits inherent to a person's race, ethnicity, or national origin that drove these types of disparities, since Irish immigrants managed to advance socially and economically once they could take on the same opportunities as everyone else. Instead, socioeconomic factors and, yes, racial and ethnic discrimination (there was a lot of anti-Irish prejudice in the 1850s) were at the heart of the problem — and those can often involve solutions beyond the realm of criminal justice policy.
Last edited:
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,701
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,701
https://x.com/FrankDeScushin/status/1803420113942556857
[MENTION=20199]Frank[/MENTION]DeScushin
I support Juneteenth.
I understand black Americans celebrating their ancestors' freedom from slavery. That makes sense, and I don't begrudge them their day.
I, however, do begrudge that history being used to explain today's outcome differences it has nothing to do with. Therein lies the problem with trying to integrate the descendants of formerly enslaved people into your populace. Many will always harbor resentment, and many will always use that history as an excuse. There's no indication either is significantly letting up as time passes.
The man most associated with freeing America's slaves, Abraham Lincoln, recognized the strained history between Blacks and Whites would cause conflict, and thus it would be best for the parties to be separated. Lincoln, however, recognized that the natural differences between the two groups would also lead to conflict and outcome differences.
Addressing a black audience Lincoln said:
“You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated.”
Today, many won't make the admission Lincoln called for, even if they recognize there's truth to it. On the contrary, many denounce any suggestion of that truth as racism and a desire to return to slavery. In reality, nobody wants slavery to return, but some, both black and white, do want the separation Lincoln suggested was best for both parties.
Therein lies the irony of Juneteenth. We celebrate people being freed from a system that enslaved them as we entrap people in a system today some wish they were free from. Woke folk yearn for a multi-racial Utopia void of racists. They could have that today if they merely let "the racists", both black and white separatists, have respective lands where they control their own destiny. Globalists won't allow that, however, because their ideology is a supremacist one which seeks to conquer all people under it.
So celebrate Juneteenth, Freedom Day, but recognize that many people today don't have the level of freedom they yearn for. They're enslaved in a system that treats Whites as tax slaves to fund a multiracial Utopia that'll always be fraught with tension.
And what do Whites get out of that?
Nothing.
While other groups are uplifted via white tax money and by virtue of living in a majority white society there's no actual benefit for Whites. Instead, their neighborhoods become less safe, their schools worse, and their opportunities reduced in the name of diversity. They're vilified if they object to any of that. Hell, they're vilified just for existing. How can one expect people to happily exist like that?
[MENTION=20199]Frank[/MENTION]DeScushin
I support Juneteenth.
I understand black Americans celebrating their ancestors' freedom from slavery. That makes sense, and I don't begrudge them their day.
I, however, do begrudge that history being used to explain today's outcome differences it has nothing to do with. Therein lies the problem with trying to integrate the descendants of formerly enslaved people into your populace. Many will always harbor resentment, and many will always use that history as an excuse. There's no indication either is significantly letting up as time passes.
The man most associated with freeing America's slaves, Abraham Lincoln, recognized the strained history between Blacks and Whites would cause conflict, and thus it would be best for the parties to be separated. Lincoln, however, recognized that the natural differences between the two groups would also lead to conflict and outcome differences.
Addressing a black audience Lincoln said:
“You and we are different races. We have between us a broader difference than exists between almost any other two races. Whether it is right or wrong I need not discuss, but this physical difference is a great disadvantage to us both, as I think your race suffer very greatly, many of them living among us, while ours suffer from your presence. In a word we suffer on each side. If this is admitted, it affords a reason at least why we should be separated.”
Today, many won't make the admission Lincoln called for, even if they recognize there's truth to it. On the contrary, many denounce any suggestion of that truth as racism and a desire to return to slavery. In reality, nobody wants slavery to return, but some, both black and white, do want the separation Lincoln suggested was best for both parties.
Therein lies the irony of Juneteenth. We celebrate people being freed from a system that enslaved them as we entrap people in a system today some wish they were free from. Woke folk yearn for a multi-racial Utopia void of racists. They could have that today if they merely let "the racists", both black and white separatists, have respective lands where they control their own destiny. Globalists won't allow that, however, because their ideology is a supremacist one which seeks to conquer all people under it.
So celebrate Juneteenth, Freedom Day, but recognize that many people today don't have the level of freedom they yearn for. They're enslaved in a system that treats Whites as tax slaves to fund a multiracial Utopia that'll always be fraught with tension.
And what do Whites get out of that?
Nothing.
While other groups are uplifted via white tax money and by virtue of living in a majority white society there's no actual benefit for Whites. Instead, their neighborhoods become less safe, their schools worse, and their opportunities reduced in the name of diversity. They're vilified if they object to any of that. Hell, they're vilified just for existing. How can one expect people to happily exist like that?
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 64,286
I agree, it's not an integration problem, but it could look like it depending upon what a person is focusing on. Forest or trees? Root causes or current problem in your face? Crime is an in your face issue, so at that level, one would focus on the criminals.
I tend to focus on bigger picture, root causes. There are many single mother, fatherless families. Some single mothers are erratic, emotional and resort to violence at every turn. Is physical violence on children acceptable? In a limited, controlled punishment way, it used to be acceptable. Teachers/nuns and rulers come to mind. But excessive violence in anger has always been child abuse, yet it is common, especially in some single mother homes. Those kids will grow up to be violent and amoral, just like they were raised. And when kids are raised in a community that has been corrupted in such a way (it takes a village), it can rub off on kids who did have decent parents.
And to step back even more, what caused this epidemic in single mother homes? The government.
From Marxists handing the victim card to women, to LBJ making government big daddy to all women and children, to no fault divorce, to a twisted court system that created incentives for divorce and robbery of men, it all added up to destroy many families. Where is the blame? Squarely with government at every turn.
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,701
Anti Federalist
Member
- Joined
- Aug 31, 2007
- Messages
- 118,701
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,940
No relation to this thread or your post, but when I clicked on the "patio furniture" tweet to get the full context, Jennifer Anniston's nipple tweet came up so I took that as a sign that this thread needed something to lighten the mood.
Edit: But keeping with the Juneteenth mood.
Last edited:
jmdrake
Member
- Joined
- Jun 6, 2007
- Messages
- 52,940
Yeah. I mentioned no fault divorce....given to us by "conservative" Ronald Reagan who basically wanted one for himself. Oh and he was an early proponent of gun control too. Reminds me of another more recent "conservative" president...but I digress.
- Joined
- Jul 13, 2007
- Messages
- 64,286
I'm not sure if this is legit, but at least I know that my next Juneteenth celebration will include ribs, watermelon, red velvet cake, and cherry Kool-Aid...
https://x.com/signulll/status/1803566689461645573
Someone commented that she got it from an AI answer, so I checked it out. Here is what I got from an AI:
