Quake3World

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:look how good the black people have it in America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

hey that's because they're on welfare, lazy, burgle, and like listening to rap music and watching rap videos on their "blacks only" TV station

I agree w/ NS & R00k as well.

So can you guys sum up what you are saying exactly here for me please?

rep wrote:There should be a white test.

1. What race is always called a racist race?
2. What race pays for 100 years of slavery when the race they enslaved took them as slaves in the Nubian empire of Egypt for much longer?
3. Does the white race benefit from equal opportunity or affirmative action?
4. Why can they have a black Santa Claus, but a white Malcom X would be racist?
5. White Entertainment Television: Would it be deemed racist?
6. What genre of entertainment has yielded the most crime, and degredation of society?
7. Black comedians: Do whites really talk like that?

Bonus Question: Don't black kids appear as a unisex until well after puberty; with some always looking like boys forever and ever?

1. gee why would the race that enslaved another race for 100 years then segregated and left them disenfranchised for another 100 years be called racist? I wonder.
2. I dunno, what race? Perhaps include some proof to back up any claims, thanks.
3. Yes. (at least it should in many ways if said programs are effective)
4.Because Santa Claus isn't real and Malcolm X was?
5.BET is called so because almost every other channel is white entertainment television whether labelled so or not. Neither BET or WET as a name is inherently racist.
6.What genre of entertainment? I'll have to go with television and Hollywood movies.
7.No, blacks do.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

R00k wrote:Have you ever worked for a company who hired unqualified black people and gave them less work at an equal pay scale, simply because they would receive more money for the department?

Why were there no qualified black people?

No qualified black people interviewed for the job. So we took an unqualified one.

SOAPboy wrote:8 of 10.. thanks..

i'm sure after taking the test and doing horribly the first time whilst writing down your answers and completing the test a second time purposely missing two so it doesn't look TOO suspicious...yeah, you're welcome.

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

rep wrote:There should be a white test.

1. What race is always called a racist race?
2. What race pays for 100 years of slavery when the race they enslaved took them as slaves in the Nubian empire of Egypt for much longer?
3. Does the white race benefit from equal opportunity or affirmative action?
4. Why can they have a black Santa Claus, but a white Malcom X would be racist?
5. White Entertainment Television: Would it be deemed racist?
6. What genre of entertainment has yielded the most crime, and degredation of society?
7. Black comedians: Do whites really talk like that?

Bonus Question: Don't black kids appear as a unisex until well after puberty; with some always looking like boys forever and ever?

1. gee why would the race that enslaved another race for 100 years then segregated and left them disenfranchised for another 100 years be called racist? I wonder.
2. I dunno, what race? Perhaps include some proof to back up any claims, thanks.
3. Yes. (at least it should in many ways if said programs are effective)
4.Because Santa Claus isn't real and Malcolm X was?
5.BET is called so because almost every other channel is white entertainment television whether labelled so or not. Neither BET or WET as a name is inherently racist.
6.What genre of entertainment? I'll have to go with television and Hollywood movies.
7.No, blacks do.

Your first response is racist in itself. I didn't have any damn thing to do with it, I don't oppress anydamnbody. Don't lump me in with a bunch of ignorant assholes.
Second, well, I'd like some facts here, too. I'm not saying I agree with everything rep's stated.
Third, that's a sticky situation, because it's hard to prove racism in cases of people not being hired. But, quotas are quotas and they are inherently unfair. If it's equality in the workplace, how about 25% of all employees being black? That would be real equality based on percentage of total population.
Fourth, you miss his point. See my previous posts.
Fifth, bullshit. That's the same logic as parents saying "little Billy doesn't deserve a Kid's Day because every day is Kid's Day". Number one, BET is designed to specifically promote blacks and black culture (does a remarkably shitty job, too). I think you'll find that there has been an ENORMOUS increase in the number of minority actors on pretty much every channel on the air. Try starting The White Entertainment Network and watch what happens.
Sixth, I don't agree with completely, but I see his point. Take a look at the crap that BET promotes as popular black culture. Guns, gangs, objectified women, cars, and money. That's pretty much it. I don't think I have to do the math for you to see what happens when black youth have that held out to them as behavior to emulate. Look at the statistics.
Seventh, I addressed this in my response to Ryoki.

prince1000 wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:look how good the black people have it in America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

hey that's because they're on welfare, lazy, burgle, and like listening to rap music and watching rap videos on their "blacks only" TV station

Yep, just dismiss all dissenting points of view, it's much easier that way.

10-1 wealth gap, healthcare inequality, systemic racism i.e. better qualified but less likely to secure a bank loan...

these are real issues... not whether it's hypocrisy to call a network the black network.

and don't say the network is for black culture, it's to exploit and make money just like the 'white channels'

Whether you want to admit it or not, our heritage on this continent is ethnic cleansing, genocide, slavery, oppression...

Do natives deserve reparation? Does everyone deserve a fair playing field?

Blacks in America go to jail longer than whites for the same crimes... these are racist realities and whether we are racist ourselves, if we won't even admit these things exist then we are even more responsible for their perpetuation.

I admit it is wrong to call all whites racist. I don't consider myself racist. But there's no way I'll lie to myself and tell myself that I don't have it way easier than people of colour do.

I also admit that affirmative action is unfair to whites, but guess what, the whole system is unfair to blacks and imagine the frustration they suffer when they get passed over for jobs they deserve. Don't tell me that doesn't happen. Hell you all think they should name their children Conrad instead of Malik so their resume won't get tossed right off the bat. Then you claim that isn't an racist attitude?

Yes, no, maybe?

I forgot to mention our continuing tradition of economically enslaving people of other races around the world so we can live like relative kings. Damn straight we live in a racist culture.

Puff.. you seem to be making the mistake that because nightshade (et al) beleives there are inequalities in favour of blacks, he must also beleive that the opposite is untrue, and blacks are never the victims of racial prejudice.

This simply isn't the case. One can beleive both things to be the case and they do not conflict. I think you already know this, but you haven't applied it the conversation.

...and to say the issues highlighted by rep/nightshade above are 'very minor in comparison to...' is like saying the police shouldn't arrest someone for pimping just because it's very minor in comparison to murder.

We don't live in a meritocracy.

Nightshade wrote:

prince1000 wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:look how good the black people have it in America.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dy ... ge=printer

hey that's because they're on welfare, lazy, burgle, and like listening to rap music and watching rap videos on their "blacks only" TV station

Yep, just dismiss all dissenting points of view, it's much easier that way.

oh boo hoo, it's simple. get to know them. the people that seem to cause the most controversy, whether it be by their manner of speaking or style of dress or filthy, filthy rap music, don't reside in the sanctity of a suburb and they are not middle class for the most part. what's the point if you're going to sit there and point fingers and whine that they do it too while doing nothing but perpetuating the situation. get off your ass and do/say something.

personally, i think there's a double standard but i don't let it affect me. i move on and don't care who's to blame so long the reality of it (people not understanding each other duh) is addressed.

R00k wrote:

HM-PuFFNSTuFF wrote:

R00k wrote:Have you ever worked for a company who hired unqualified black people and gave them less work at an equal pay scale, simply because they would receive more money for the department?

Why were there no qualified black people?

No qualified black people interviewed for the job. So we took an unqualified one.

yeah but what does that really have to do with any black person? your company saw a loophole it sounds like and took advantage, at least that's what it looks like from what you said (the dept. got more funding for hiring a black person).

You are far too ignorant to be making the sort of statements you do. You know NOTHING about me, my life, and my experiences. Yet, you feel perfectly qualified to make all kinds of sweeping judgements about my opinions and my character.
You sir, are a baselessly arrogant fool too wrapped up in your own predjudices and false self-righteousness to truly consider another's opinion. You can say whatever you want, but all your statements to this point clearly illustrate that you haven't digested a single fucking thing I've said.
Get bent.

uhh i was talking more about the middle of the road american, not you specifically, but whatever. don't cry.

edit: and you seemed to have missed the part with me sort of conceding your precious opinion...

Hmmm I would question some of those facts in that quiz. Like the first question. 100 million killed within a century of 1492? Seems a little high to me, that is a like killing one in three Americans today. Plus there couldn’t have been more than a couple of million in what is the U.S. today back in those days, so where did the other 98 million or so live?

Maiden wrote:Hmmm I would question some of those facts in that quiz. Like the first question. 100 million killed within a century of 1492? Seems a little high to me, that is a like killing one in three Americans today. Plus there couldn’t have been more than a couple of million in what is the U.S. today back in those days, so where did the other 98 million or so live?

http://www.understandingprejudice.org/r ... nocide.htm

this one looks like it might have the data you're interested in:

Thornton, R. (1990). American Indian Holocaust and Survival: A Population History Since 1492. Norman, OK: University of Oklahoma Press.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/ ... 38-9728034

Just how many Indians were living in the Americas in 1492 is a hotly debated issue. In this well-organized presentation, Thornton systematically compares the various approaches scholars have taken , drawing his own conclusions . Among the factors he considers are the devastation caused by Old World diseases and wars with European settlers and the impact of Western removal on the Indian populace. Thornton also reviews contemporary Native American population gains and the increasing urbanization of this group as a whole in the 20th century. Highly recommended for American history collections in public and academic libraries. Mary B. Davis, Museum of the American Indian Lib., New York
Copyright 1987 Reed Business Information, Inc.--This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

prince1000 wrote:uhh i was talking more about the middle of the road american, not you specifically, but whatever. don't cry.

edit: and you seemed to have missed the part with me sort of conceding your precious opinion...

I don't care, you're a fucking arrogant blowhard.

Incredible ...The correct answer is "nearly 100 million -- roughly 95% of the population."

Within a few generations of their first encounter with Europeans, nearly all native people in the Western Hemisphere were exterminated. In terms of the number dead, the destruction of the Indians of the Americas ranks as the largest act of genocide in history.

I didn't even know there were so many many people in the Western Hemisphere at that time.

Can't imagine what would have happenned, should this massacre
never occured.

What a Hitler type of massacre.

They must have change a part of life history.

Pete

*posting in a [Jeno]Xulios thread*