To reach blacks, libertarians must begin to understand the African-American experience

[osan]

You don't get it at all.

Please illuminate. What am I missing?

 

[tod evans]

Please illuminate. What am I missing?

Obsequiousness....

 

[acptulsa]

Please illuminate. What am I missing?

Except where you're talking about demographics that you actually know, and don't turn away from out of hand due to your obvious biases, you're blatantly missing a whole lot of...

...and other than a tiny handful of sensible and non-fearful examples...

I'll say it again.

This movement is about individuals. Demographics are a divide and conquer tactic. This movement is about individuals.

'There is one rule that works in every calamity be it pestilence, war or famine, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. The poor even help arrange it.'--Will Rogers

Why do the poor help arrange it? Two reasons--either they're fooled into thinking they're getting it over on someone else (almost always a different demographic) or they're afraid of someone who looks at them as a demographic, not a person, and they think they're protecting themselves.

If you can't see that every demographic has a 'tiny handful of sensible and non-fearful examples' you're contributing to the problem and moving us away from the solution. And defying the movement's most core principle--that individuals have God-given rights, including the right to excel in the pursuit of happiness--in the process.

You say...

...these poor and so obviously inferior people ...

...without a hint that you have your tongue in your cheek but Mr. Drake makes better points than you and more cogently, and you are willing to give a few Jews credit where credit is due but won't do it for him. Fail.

You make a valid point or two but as long as you bury it in your demographic, collectivist bullshit it will never be seen and appreciated. Are you trying to accomplish what you're accomplishing--in other words, are you a plant trying to undermine us by bathing our principles in muck and mire--or are you just a self-defeating fool? Either way, gee, thanks.

 

[osan]

Are you serious? All blacks don't do anything for themselves and are most fond of tearing each other down? You think that's the only reason for the statistically significant systemic economic and academic depression among American blacks? I'm ashamed to see such overt racism on this forum, which I regard as a group of particularly open minded friends of justice.

Oh for pity's sake - racism? Really? I am surprised at you. I believe I mentioned that race has nothing to do with this. I also made it very clear I was speaking statistically and observation of large populations will bear out what I have asserted. What do you think is the basis and effect of blacks calling each other "nygger"? It is a term of contempt. I grew up in the middle of all this and saw countless thousands of examples of the brand of self-hatred that fueled such behavior.

Shoot, I will never forget my first year teaching when two black girls got into words with each other. Finally the lighter skinned one shut the other one dead up when she said she was better looking than the other's "black burned up ass". That is pure and utter contempt for "blackness", expressed by one black person against another. You cannot really slice that pie any differently. It's not racism that drives me to write this - it is first hand experience in things I've observed more times that you could shake your stick at. It is fact and I could prove it to you any hour of any day of the week by taking you to a 'hood and just standing around and observing how folks interact.

If you want to cry "racism", then point your words to the black folk who show nothing but the most bitter contempt for themselves on that basis. Action speaks more powerfully than words alone.

Take any individual black person in hard times and you don't know why. But we know that people with attitudes like yours are more likely to be in a position to hire than an equally stupid black man.

So you feel the need to make things personal without having uncovered truth? OK - so noted.

This attitude has nothing to do with color of skin.

Show me where I wrote that it did. Please - quote the text, and good luck with it because I never wrote nor implied any such a thing. I was making a statistical observation about black people in America because that is the subject at hand. Had you made the effort to query me prior to attempting to drill me a new asshole, you might have asked something like, "are you saying that black people are unique in this and that the quality is the result of race?", to which I would have answered in the negative. But the truth is that a great multiplicity of black people want to have nothing to do with responsibility for themselves and want much to be handed them on a silver platter. That is reality and I have not written that ONLY blacks do this, do you can un-knot your shorts. The point I was clearly making and which you clearly missed was that black people are responsible for the ways in which they run their lives. To say otherwise is once again implying in a most direct fashion that they are incapable of doing so, and I would call THAT the racist position. My position is precisely the non-racially based stance because I am saying they CHOOSE their behaviors. This should be pretty easy to deduce from what I wrote without a whole lot of reading between the lines.

Every crackhead in America is blaming everyone but themselves.

Agreed, but we were not talking about EVERY crackhead. We were discussing BLACK crackheads in specific and my point is that they chose and are, therefore, their own victims. That does not mean there was no conspiracy against them, but that they could have chosen otherwise. To deny this is not even remotely credible unless, once again, you concede that black people are simply not up to responsible adult living. I know this is not the case and therefore my position is proven by contradiction.

Government actively encouraged crack use in black communities. Government is almost all white. Blame whitey indeed!

Oy... One more time: this is about power and not race. The perception of race was nothing more than an incidental factor upon which those running the circus could seize and make their hay, which was done well.

Wherever there is injustice any person should step in, without considering the color of their skin first. Anyone promoting bad policies should be criticized, no matter the color of their skin.

Did I indicate otherwise?

That's all you needed to say.

I take it your sarcasm detector is on the fritz. Might want to take it to the shop for repairs

 

[osan]

Obsequiousness....

Never was very good at that.

Except where you're talking about demographics that you actually know, and don't turn away from out of hand due to your obvious biases, you're blatantly missing a whole lot of...

Yes? I'm listening.

What obvious biases are those to which you refer? You write in half-thoughts... are you teasing me? Seriously, if you have something definite to say, then say it. Let us now waste time miscommunicating.

I'll say it again.

This movement is about individuals. Demographics are a divide and conquer tactic. This movement is about individuals.

Agreed, but that does not invalidate STATISTICAL observations made on large populations and that was what I was explicitly doing. Hell, I even bolded the text to make sure that part was not missed.

Demographics, in case you've not been paying attention, work. They are effective, which you concede obliquely via complaint. They may be used to "divide and conquer", but the observations and conclusions that underpin them are valid... which is WHY they work. They don't have to be perfect, they only have to be good enough, and they are most certainly that.

If you can't see that every demographic has a 'tiny handful of sensible and non-fearful examples' you're contributing to the problem and moving us away from the solution.

Yeah, I understand statistics pretty well.

And defying the movement's most core principle--that individuals have God-given rights, including the right to excel in the pursuit of happiness--in the process.

??? You're accusing me of this - or are you speaking in the general?

 

[acptulsa]

I take it your sarcasm detector is on the fritz. Might want to take it to the shop for repairs

When you think seventeen people had their sarcasm detectors go out at once, you're wrong. Either 'What we have here is a failure to communicate' or somewhere deep inside you don't really think it's sarcasm--and it shows to others even where your self-imposed blinders keep you from seeing it.

Don't honestly know which in your case. But we here tend to call them like we read them.

Seriously, if you have something definite to say, then say it. Let us now waste time miscommunicating.

Read it without the blinders and it will be clear enough. And your only possible defense is you have already been 'miscommunicating'.

??? You're accusing me of this - or are you speaking in the general?

I am speaking with considerable specificity.

 

[nayjevin]

Yes, it was devastating, but it was those folks who devastated themselves. Nobody marched an armed force into the 'hood and made people smoke crack at the end of a barrel. The precise same can be said for any other "community", including the white.

Crack uses force - addiction. Crack uses fraud - illusion of a better existence.

 

[osan]

E
...without a hint that you have your tongue in your cheek

Oh jesus... I've been posting here for what, five years, and you're going to tell me you cannot tell my sarcasm by now? It seems you read what I wrote assuming facts not in evidence and made your judgments based on that alone. You might want to try differently next time, but that is up to you.

but Mr. Drake makes better points than you and more cogently,

Well, I'm not going to get into a pissing match that seems to exist nowhere but inside your own skull.

and you are willing to give a few Jews credit where credit is due but won't do it for him. Fail.

Your assumption seems to be that because I did not run down the entire litany of equivalence classes that I have denied credit. I would call THAT fail. Once again, instead of asking what I meant by X, you assumed the "worst" and proceeded based on that.

You make a valid point or two but as long as you bury it in your demographic, collectivist bullshit it will never be seen and appreciated.

Sorry, but this is pure nonsense. Accurate statistical statements made based upon valid observations hold strongly for the valid populations. They often fail when applied to individuals - yeah we all know that. I've buried nothing. You simply failed to correctly read what I wrote.

Are you trying to accomplish what you're accomplishing--in other words, are you a plant trying to undermine us by bathing our principles in muck and mire--or are you just a self-defeating fool? Either way, gee, thanks.

A plant? Go see a shrink pal because you're going paranoid beyond good reason. When you learn to read properly, I suggest you go back and do a line by line semantic analysis of what I wrote. You will find that nothing I wrote was false and that it holds true in the context in which I made them, which was about populations and NOT individuals. Learn something about statistics and you will see that the statements I made were valid and in fact true. The truth I expressed is uncomfy for some but IMO it needs to be made open and clear for people to see. Getting down to actualities and specifics to the topic at hand, do you think the "average" black fellow is going to benefit by not speaking truthfully? It seems to me that the contemporary trend to blow sunshine up everyone's ass has not helped anyone, black or otherwise, a whole lot. Telling people they are OK or even wonderful when they are fucking up royally is not a kindness. It is a betrayal.

 

[acptulsa]

You simply failed to correctly read what I wrote.

Yes, yes. You couldn't have failed to write what you meant. Obviously everyone else simply didn't read it right.

 

[osan]

Crack uses force - addiction. Crack uses fraud - illusion of a better existence.

Oh come on d00d... that isn't the point and I have to believe that you know it.

I was addressing taking the bait in the first place. If we grant that the first wave of addicts could be excused for naiveté, what about the second? The third? The tenth? IS it your assertion that after 30 years of watching people's lives turn to shit that one can claim they didn't know what the result of that first hit might be? And just to be clear so you don't have a cow and go running out your front door screaming "osan's a racist" to the universe, I am speaking of ANYONE who chooses to take that first hit TODAY, all them evil white people included. Do I have to use a smiley, or can you tell I'm at least attempting to diffuse with mildly sarcastic humor?

Oh, and I don't think crack uses anything... I may be wrong, but is it not inanimate?

 

[osan]

Yes, yes. You couldn't have failed to write what you meant. Obviously everyone else simply didn't read it right.

OK, I will ask you a SECOND TIME to point out where my communication failed. If you can, I will readily concede. I've done it before and have no problem doing it again.

Ball is in your court.

ETA: I notice that you did not respond to any of my points in response to your previous statements. May I take it you concede?

 

[acptulsa]

OK, I will ask you a SECOND TIME to point out where my communication failed. If you can, I will readily concede. I've done it before and have no problem doing it again.

Ball is in your court.

As many times as I and others have quoted you, and as many times as you have defended yourself already, all that's left to do is to forcibly pry your blinders from your head. And I have better things to do on the Fourth of July than violate the NAP.

Been there, done that, don't feel repetitious. I'm here to save our reputations from you, not to save your soul from you. So, I'm done.

 

[nayjevin]

Oh for pity's sake - racism? Really? I am surprised at you. I believe I mentioned that race has nothing to do with this.

You said something racist, then said racism has nothing to do with it. So?

That "black people" (whatever in hell that even means) are statistically still in the shit tube has NOTHING to do with "white privilege" or anything else other than the fact that they don't do anything for themselves and are most fond of tearing each other down.

You said this. And you think it's wrong for people to assume you're racist. Therefore 'you don't get it at all.'

I also made it very clear I was speaking statistically and observation of large populations will bear out what I have asserted. What do you think is the basis and effect of blacks calling each other "nygger"? It is a term of contempt. I grew up in the middle of all this and saw countless thousands of examples of the brand of self-hatred that fueled such behavior.

You are attempting to put a single reason for using that word onto every time it has ever been used. Broad brush.

Shoot, I will never forget my first year teaching when two black girls got into words with each other. Finally the lighter skinned one shut the other one dead up when she said she was better looking than the other's "black burned up ass". That is pure and utter contempt for "blackness", expressed by one black person against another.

So? Are white people cannibals because of what Jeffrey Dahmer did?

You cannot really slice that pie any differently.

Why not?

It's not racism that drives me to write this - it is first hand experience in things I've observed more times that you could shake your stick at. It is fact and I could prove it to you any hour of any day of the week by taking you to a 'hood and just standing around and observing how folks interact.

There's nothing to prove. There is no truth that you have stated which I don't also know to be true. But there are claims you have made which aren't.

If you want to cry "racism", then point your words to the black folk who show nothing but the most bitter contempt for themselves on that basis. Action speaks more powerfully than words alone.

When someone points out overt racism, you call it crying. You 'don't get it at all.'

If you tell a child they are worthless because of their enlarged kneecap, they will hate their enlarged kneecap. You are finding examples of the child who hates their kneecap and saying that they are the problem.

So you feel the need to make things personal without having uncovered truth? OK - so noted.

Racism is stupid - truth.

Show me where I wrote that it did. Please - quote the text, and good luck with it because I never wrote nor implied any such a thing. I was making a statistical observation about black people in America because that is the subject at hand.

That "black people" (whatever in hell that even means) are statistically still in the shit tube has NOTHING to do with "white privilege" or anything else other than the fact that they don't do anything for themselves and are most fond of tearing each other down.

You said this. And you think it's wrong for people to assume you're racist. Therefore 'you don't get it at all.'

Had you made the effort to query me prior to attempting to drill me a new asshole, you might have asked something like, "are you saying that black people are unique in this and that the quality is the result of race?", to which I would have answered in the negative.

It's not up to me to get you to clarify your obviously racist statements.

But the truth is that a great multiplicity of black people want to have nothing to do with responsibility for themselves and want much to be handed them on a silver platter. That is reality and I have not written that ONLY blacks do this, do you can un-knot your shorts.

To believe there is no greater statistically significant portion of blacks who believe this way than that of the general public, yet word things as you did, is statistically significant intellect deprivation.

The point I was clearly making and which you clearly missed was that black people are responsible for the ways in which they run their lives.

People are responsible for the ways in which they run their lives. Black people are people.

To say otherwise is once again implying in a most direct fashion that they are incapable of doing so, and I would call THAT the racist position.

Who said otherwise? You're confusing to the detriment of all involved. The argument is that outside factors affect opportunity. You act as though it's impossible for there to be racial outcomes to policy. But it's obvious that there are racial outcomes to a great number of policies - not to mention the fact that people like you are all over the place - making arrests, judgments, and hiring decisions.

Black people are incarcerated at a higher rate than white people - even where each group has an equal probability of committing that crime. You want to blame their kids for not knowing how to be fathers and mothers for the next generation.

My position is precisely the non-racially based stance because I am saying they CHOOSE their behaviors. This should be pretty easy to deduce from what I wrote without a whole lot of reading between the lines.

You are making a point to single out blackness where it is not relevant. i.e. racism

Agreed, but we were not talking about EVERY crackhead. We were discussing BLACK crackheads in specific and my point is that they chose and are, therefore, their own victims.

Crack uses force - addiction. Crack uses fraud - the illusion of a better existence. Crack society uses fraud - peer pressure. Social condition creates disadvantage - living without parents or parents who use crack would cause a child to see it differently. But it's not their fault - though they have a chance to make the right choice, it is not an equal chance to one who has not grown up that way. And we have income and economic disparity in part because of policies entirely out of the control of people affected by them.

 

[jmdrake]

Agreed. Race had nothing to do with it, per se. Power, OTOH, did.

Glad you can see that.

Yes, it was devastating, but it was those folks who devastated themselves. Nobody marched an armed force into the 'hood and made people smoke crack at the end of a barrel. The precise same can be said for any other "community", including the white.

Remember I called it a "one/two" punch. When I drive by a drug stake out and get pulled over for no reason other than the fact that I stared at the cops too long (yes that did happen to me and I was on my way to a law school final), that is an armed person marching into my community with force against me even though I haven't done anything wrong.

Not the best analogy. "Guinea pig" might be more apropos. That trifle aside, Theye got away with it because black folks let them. Theye are getting away with that which they do today because we are ALL letting them get away with it. We are ALL to blame - Themme for being the covetous, treacherous little hacks that they are, and the rest of us for not lynching every last stinking one of them. Shame on us all.

No argument there.

Example? Just wondering where you'd go with this.

The people who profit off of prisons and lobby for new laws for the purpose of increasing their profits? The people who profit off of wars? Corrupt public officials in both parties?

The latter by far the more dangerous. In the days of open chattel slavery everyone knew the score. Now, almost nobody does anymore.

Right. That's why education is paramount. Someone recently posted an article here at RPF about how there are more slave today via prison labor than there was in 1850 under chattel slavery. I've posted that on FB and Twitter and have already received a positive response from people in my community. That goes a lot further in reaching the goal of promoting libertarianism among blacks them simply saying "Black folks need to do better."

Something meaningful. In principle I agree completely, but in practice the $64 is "How?" I never cease to be amazed at both blacks and jews who hold to the progressive-democrat line. It is mind boggling. If I were the descendant of the American slave era, the last thing I'd be advocating, for example, would be gun control and a large state government. Just how endlessly stupid can you get? It was GOVERNMENT who actively supported and often drew the framework for chattel slave trading. It was GOVERNMENT who instituted Jim Crow. It was GOVERNMENT who failed to protect those poor bastards from the lynch mobs. Virtually every outrage perpetrated upon inherently free men came to pass at the hands of government, directly or otherwise, yet the current crop of black imbeciles look to government to save them from the jazzy-ole white man. For pity's sake, someone is sawing your damned arm off with a herring and making a pretty good show of it. Might you not want to stop praying to them and smack them into the next three counties, perhaps?

Okay. I put one part of what you wrote in bold. I will repeat it here. It was GOVERNMENT who failed to protect those poor bastards from the lynch mobs.

I hope you can see the irony. On the one hand you are pointing out the failures of government. On the other hand you attacked the government for not acting. I understand your position. But can't you see that someone might look at the lynch mob part of the argument and say "Yeah! We need a strong federal government because the state government implemented Jim Crowe and failed to protect blacks from lynch mobs?" Sometimes people get mad at me for pointing out how part of what they are saying helps the argument I'm making against them. But that's just how I think. And if you can stop to look at the points you are making from the point of view of the person arguing against you, you might see that their position, while possibly misguided, is not "stupid". Lynch mobs by in large no longer happen in the U.S. (Except with the police are beating homeless people to death.) You're wanting to convince people to give up the main tool that they have had against they tyranny of the majority, namely a "strong Federal government", without fully addressing their fears. It's not going to work that way. Point out how that "strong Federal government" is actually directly harming them. The drug war is one way to do that. There are others.

After what jews went through in Europe under Hitler, one would think every jew on the planet would be 10 million percent behind the right to keep and bear arms. The vast majority are terrified of guns and want them taken from everyone. I grew up marinaded in jews and other than a tiny handful of sensible and non-fearful examples, not a one of them was anything other than completely opposed to "ordinary" people having access to guns. Just "military and police".

Have you read the full history of Hitler's rise to power? Long before the Nazi's became the government, they were paramilitary thugs who engaged in pitched gun battles with Communist paramilitary thugs. Basically it was a fight between ideological versions of the Bloods and the Crypts. Against that backdrop I could see why a Jew would be for gun control to prevent such crazies from becoming a powerful force in the first place. Some Jews are against full first amendment rights when it comes to free speech for the same reason. They don't want another charismatic "Hitler" like character arising. I remember once I was at a meeting about what to do regarding brutality in private prisons. One Jewish doctor added "We must do something about dangerous speech" to the discussion even though it had nothing to do with what we were talking about. I responded with "What about the first amendment" and she got quiet. That said I know not all Jews feel that way. In fact some support gun rights. (Jews for the preservation of firearms.) I'm just stating that once you understand what people fear and why, you have a better way to understand and ultimately influence them.

Seriously, it is as if there is some massive and intense Stockholm deal going on with those two groups in relation to government. It makes no sense to me at all. The thing that threatens them most is the thing to which they fall upon their knees, mouths wide open and ready. It's sick.

The most accurate thing you have said is "It makes no sense to me at all." If you want to have influence with either group (or with Christian conservatives....or with feminists or with fill-in-the-blank) you'll have to take your time to understand what others are truly feeling.

 

[osan]

You said something racist

OK, you see it as you do no matter how I attempt to explain it, so how about we just leave this dog sleeping? If I meant it as a racist slur, I would claim it. I have tried to make it clear and you don't seem to want to accept my explicitly state position as being mine, but that your misinterpretation is. That's OK by me. I have nothing to prove here.

To believe there is no greater statistically significant portion of blacks who believe this way than that of the general public, yet word things as you did, is statistically significant intellect deprivation.

One again making things personal. Noted again.

Have a happy 4th.

 

[MelissaWV]

If you want to cry "racism", then point your words to the black folk....

 

[osan]

Originally Posted by osan
Agreed. Race had nothing to do with it, per se. Power, OTOH, did.



Glad you can see that.


Yes, it was devastating, but it was those folks who devastated themselves. Nobody marched an armed force into the 'hood and made people smoke crack at the end of a barrel. The precise same can be said for any other "community", including the white.


Remember I called it a "one/two" punch. When I drive by a drug stake out and get pulled over for no reason other than the fact that I stared at the cops too long (yes that did happen to me and I was on my way to a law school final), that is an armed person marching into my community with force against me even though I haven't done anything wrong.

Two things. First, sorry you had to experience shit like that. Second, you are confusing apples with oranges. I will not disagree with what you wrote, but I'm not sure how it applies to what I wrote. Specifically, I meant that nobody to my knowledge was making people take that first hit at the end of a gun. People CHOSE to take it, or am I wrong?

Not the best analogy. "Guinea pig" might be more apropos. That trifle aside, Theye got away with it because black folks let them. Theye are getting away with that which they do today because we are ALL letting them get away with it. We are ALL to blame - Themme for being the covetous, treacherous little hacks that they are, and the rest of us for not lynching every last stinking one of them. Shame on us all.

No argument there.

Well I'm glad at least you see my point. Someone here seems hell bent to paint me as a card-carrying Klansman. Their problem, but still I'd rather be properly understood.

Example? Just wondering where you'd go with this.

The people who profit off of prisons and lobby for new laws for the purpose of increasing their profits? The people who profit off of wars? Corrupt public officials in both parties?

OK, I see what you're driving at. These things are monumental evils living among us.

The latter by far the more dangerous. In the days of open chattel slavery everyone knew the score. Now, almost nobody does anymore.

Right. That's why education is paramount. Someone recently posted an article here at RPF about how there are more slave today via prison labor than there was in 1850 under chattel slavery. I've posted that on FB and Twitter and have already received a positive response from people in my community. That goes a lot further in reaching the goal of promoting libertarianism among blacks them simply saying "Black folks need to do better."

OTOH, look at the reception guys like Bill Cosby get from "his own" (sorry - I know the expression is shit, but I'm trying to be conversational). He points out some rather unattractive STATISTICAL truths about the "community" and that same community wants him hanging from his dangly bits.

Something meaningful. In principle I agree completely, but in practice the $64 is "How?" I never cease to be amazed at both blacks and jews who hold to the progressive-democrat line. It is mind boggling. If I were the descendant of the American slave era, the last thing I'd be advocating, for example, would be gun control and a large state government. Just how endlessly stupid can you get? It was GOVERNMENT who actively supported and often drew the framework for chattel slave trading. It was GOVERNMENT who instituted Jim Crow. It was GOVERNMENT who failed to protect those poor bastards from the lynch mobs. Virtually every outrage perpetrated upon inherently free men came to pass at the hands of government, directly or otherwise, yet the current crop of black imbeciles look to government to save them from the jazzy-ole white man. For pity's sake, someone is sawing your damned arm off with a herring and making a pretty good show of it. Might you not want to stop praying to them and smack them into the next three counties, perhaps?


Okay. I put one part of what you wrote in bold. I will repeat it here. It was GOVERNMENT who failed to protect those poor bastards from the lynch mobs.

I hope you can see the irony.

The irony was the whole point of the statement.

On the one hand you are pointing out the failures of government. On the other hand you attacked the government fornot acting. I understand your position. But can't you see that someone might look at the lynch mob part of the argument and say "Yeah! We need a strong federal government because the state government implemented Jim Crowe and failed to protect blacks from lynch mobs?"

I'd not considered that bit explicitly, but yes of course. It is pretty obvious... and ironic after a fashion. But is this not pretty much the standard operating procedure in terms of reasoning for ever more authority? Nonetheless the tactic is logically bankrupt... not that that makes any difference in the real world where the average man cannot or will not dope such things out properly.

Sometimes people get mad at me for pointing out how part of what they are saying helps the argument I'm making against them. But that's just how I think. And if you can stop to look at the points you are making from the point of view of the person arguing

against you, you might see that their position, while possibly misguided, is not "stupid". Lynch mobs by in large no longer happen in the U.S. (Except with the police are beating homeless people to death.) You're wanting to convince people to give up the main tool that they have had against they tyranny of the majority, namely a "strong Federal government", without fully addressing their fears.

Don't assume too much here about my intentions. Space and time are limited and if someone wishes to raise the point as have you, I am happy to address it, but otherwise I could spend my life here writing volume after tedious volume in the effort to be complete where it is not quite necessary.

It's not going to work that way. Point out how that "strong Federal government" is actually directly harming them. The drug war is one way to do that. There are others.

I've done this endlessly and while many people are open to fact and reason, there is a disturbingly large plurality that will not give you a fair hearing no matter what you do. I have executed picture perfect Socratic method on people who, when faced with their own contradictions based on things they agreed were true, simply refused to accept truth as it shouted in their ears. You can't fix stupid.

Have you read the full history of Hitler's rise to power? Long before the Nazi's became the government, they were paramilitary thugs who engaged in pitched gun battles with Communist paramilitary thugs. Basically it was a fight between ideological versions of the Bloods and the Crypts. Against that backdrop I could see why a Jew would be for gun control to prevent such crazies from becoming a powerful force in the first place. Some Jews are against full first amendment rights when it comes to free speech for the same reason. They don't want another charismatic "Hitler" like character arising.

Yes, but those are children's answers, not those of presumably intelligent adults. When put under even casual scrutiny, such argumentation falls apart without any outside assistance. When presented with unbreakable logic, they put their fingers in their ears, close their eyes, stomp up and down and scream "I can't HEAR you!" over and over until the shrill notes make your ears bleed, ending you in the ER.

I remember once I was at a meeting about what to do regarding brutality in private prisons. One Jewish doctor added "We must do something about dangerous speech" to the discussion even though it had nothing to do with what we were talking about. I responded with "What about the first amendment" and she got quiet. That said I know not all Jews feel that way. In fact some support gun rights. (Jews for the preservation of firearms.) I'm just stating that once you understand what people fear and why, you have a better way to understand and ultimately influence them.

I did not mean to imply all jews or all of anyone are this or that, but in this particular case, those in favor of the RKBA are a very distinctly small minority. It's a culture thing and very dangerous, as history attests. It is interesting how differently Israelis view this vis-à-vis jews in America.

Seriously, it is as if there is some massive and intense Stockholm deal going on with those two groups in relation to government. It makes no sense to me at all. The thing that threatens them most is the thing to which they fall upon their knees, mouths wide open and ready. It's sick.

The most accurate thing you have said is "It makes no sense to me at all." If you want to have influence with either group (or with Christian conservatives....or with feminists or with fill-in-the-blank) you'll have to take your time to understand what others are truly feeling.

Agreed, but in far too many cases understanding is sadly insufficient. I would not care were it not for the fact that so many people seem so perfectly impervious to truth and reason.

 

[jmdrake]

[/COLOR]
Two things. First, sorry you had to experience shit like that. Second, you are confusing apples with oranges. I will not disagree with what you wrote, but I'm not sure how it applies to what I wrote. Specifically, I meant that nobody to my knowledge was making people take that first hit at the end of a gun. People CHOSE to take it, or am I wrong?

Oh I don't mind the negative experiences I've had. (Most of them anyway). If I never had them then I wouldn't be able to share them or relate to people who did.

Second, apples and oranges mix together quite well to make ambrosia (food of the gods). And yes, I know what you're trying to say, but I disagree. If someone entices someone to do something, then punishes that person for doing that, the "mix" is appropriate. I would say the same thing for the U.S. government encouraging Saddam Hussein to invade Iran, then later turning around and using Saddam's invasion of Iran as part of the pretext for war against Iraq. And while it's quite possible that someone, somewhere had a gun to his head to take the first hit of crack, the fact that most made the choice does not absolve the culpability of those who brought the drugs into the community in the first place. Of course using the "canary in the coal mine" example, increasingly it's poor whites getting caught up in the drug prison industrial complex because of crystal meth. Again blacks were just test subjects or "guinea pigs" as you put it.

Well I'm glad at least you see my point. Someone here seems hell bent to paint me as a card-carrying Klansman. Their problem, but still I'd rather be properly understood.

LOL. Well we'd all like to be properly understood. Did you hear about the black musician that became friends with actual card-carrying klansmen? Some of them left the klan.

OK, I see what you're driving at. These things are monumental evils living among us.

Glad you see where I'm going. I don't always know myself.

OTOH, look at the reception guys like Bill Cosby get from "his own" (sorry - I know the expression is shit, but I'm trying to be conversational). He points out some rather unattractive STATISTICAL truths about the "community" and that same community wants him hanging from his dangly bits.

No problem with the expression. The reason Bill Cosby caught hell is because he made his statements publicly and blacks were concerned that (some) whites would take those statements in isolation and run with them. Go be a fly on the wall and many black homes on Sunday dinner and you'll hear similar comments. Think of it this way. Rand Paul catches hell sometimes on these forums. But I bet even most of his critics here would be upset to see someone from our ranks attacking him on national TV. I'm not saying it was right to criticize Cosby. I'm saying it's human nature. Now here's the question. Armed with the information that Bill's comments were not an "isolated incident", how do you reach out to blacks who agree with his position, but are wary of those who might exploit his words for divisive reasons?

[/B]The irony was the whole point of the statement.

Right. But I'm looking at the irony from a different vantage point. In the 1950s - 1960s the Federal Government took an activist role in Southern politics. By the 1970s lynch mobs were a thing of the past. (I certainly don't remember any). So you're using the existence of lynch mobs prior to an expansive Federal role in Southern politics to advocate what exactly?

[/B][/B][/B]I'd not considered that bit explicitly, but yes of course. It is pretty obvious... and ironic after a fashion. But is this not pretty much the standard operating procedure in terms of reasoning for ever more authority? Nonetheless the tactic is logically bankrupt... not that that makes any difference in the real world where the average man cannot or will not dope such things out properly.

I agree. And the way to defeat that logic, in my opinion, is to show how abuse of Federal power has had unfavorable consequences to the person or group in question.

[/B]Don't assume too much here about my intentions. Space and time are limited and if someone wishes to raise the point as have you, I am happy to address it, but otherwise I could spend my life here writing volume after tedious volume in the effort to be complete where it is not quite necessary.

Okay. But the thread is about reaching blacks with the libertarian viewpoint. So the OP's intention is to change the point of view of someone else.

I've done this endlessly and while many people are open to fact and reason, there is a disturbingly large plurality that will not give you a fair hearing no matter what you do. I have executed picture perfect Socratic method on people who, when faced with their own contradictions based on things they agreed were true, simply refused to accept truth as it shouted in their ears. You can't fix stupid.

Except sometimes "stupid" is just an inability to put something into a form the listener will accept. Come on. I got someone wearing a Che Guevera t-shirt to push for a 5% flat tax!

Yes, but those are children's answers, not those of presumably intelligent adults. When put under even casual scrutiny, such argumentation falls apart without any outside assistance. When presented with unbreakable logic, they put their fingers in their ears, close their eyes, stomp up and down and scream "I can't HEAR you!" over and over until the shrill notes make your ears bleed, ending you in the ER.

Ummm...if you say so. But did you know that putting something within six bold tags like your doing doesn't do anything for your post? Seriously, only one bold tag is needed to bold texts and the other bold tags are redundant. Similarly using the same argument over and over again to convince someone else of your position doesn't do anything. Some of us are trying other arguments and are having some success. You could do the same. Or you just just lament that those who aren't being persuaded by you are stupid.

I did not mean to imply all jews or all of anyone are this or that, but in this particular case, those in favor of the RKBA are a very distinctly small minority. It's a culture thing and very dangerous, as history attests. It is interesting how differently Israelis view this vis-à-vis jews in America.

Jews in Israel are the majority. Jews in America are in the minority. If you are afraid of the majority then you might not want the majority keeping and bearing arms. That said, are Israeli Jews in favor of Israeli Arabs having the right to keep and bear arms?

Agreed, but in far too many cases understanding is sadly insufficient. I would not care were it not for the fact that so many people seem so perfectly impervious to truth and reason.

So many people? To double your political influence you only need to convince one other person. To go exponential you need to convince two other people both of whom only need to convince two other people who all need to convince two other people and......

 

[James Madison]

Libertarians aren't fans of personal responsibility anymore it seems. Easier to blame someone else for your own failings.

 

[nayjevin]

One again making things personal. Noted again.

Have a happy 4th.

Racist who doesn't like being called a racist taking the high road.

The thing about racists is they always collectivize individual traits.