what is the most significant cause of prejudice in our society
- Thread starter stressfacta
- Start date
I think the majority of this forum has the potential to go over your head, but as requested, I will not worry about it. The answer to your question, neither. White racism today is just as it states, white racism. I don't think I even mentioned it in my entire post.
That is speculation, a bold statement without finding, but I will accept it here as a truth. Classism might have been present since the beginning of man, but it was to the same degree or embraced in the same manner as it is today. The entire country wasn't seperated and treated differently based on their class.
I guess I should have broken it down into lamens. This was an issue of the war (thought I said that) not the cause of the war. We arn't discussing the cause of the civil war, but the relevance it had with prejudice today.
"No one creates a class to oppress to keep themselves upper class [...] An oppressed class that *isn't* slaves does nothing for you. "
Right, because to do something like that would be completely out of the question and irrational. Just like a country sailing across the sea to another continent to steal humans and enslave, kill, and rape them so hard their anscestors feel it, would be irrational. When you observe what white supremacy has done in the past, you think it is so far fetched that they would continue to opress a race of humans to make themselves look and feel better? What the fuck do you think white supremacy is devil. Opressing a class does nothing but make you look superior, that is the concept of supremacy. You trying to be so complex that your missing the basic fundamentals of white (supremacist) ideology that has been present from the beginning of America to our present day. Your statements are basically arguing it's very existance.
That is speculation, a bold statement without finding, but I will accept it here as a truth. Classism might have been present since the beginning of man, but it was to the same degree or embraced in the same manner as it is today. The entire country wasn't seperated and treated differently based on their class.
I guess I should have broken it down into lamens. This was an issue of the war (thought I said that) not the cause of the war. We arn't discussing the cause of the civil war, but the relevance it had with prejudice today.
"No one creates a class to oppress to keep themselves upper class [...] An oppressed class that *isn't* slaves does nothing for you. "
Right, because to do something like that would be completely out of the question and irrational. Just like a country sailing across the sea to another continent to steal humans and enslave, kill, and rape them so hard their anscestors feel it, would be irrational. When you observe what white supremacy has done in the past, you think it is so far fetched that they would continue to opress a race of humans to make themselves look and feel better? What the fuck do you think white supremacy is devil. Opressing a class does nothing but make you look superior, that is the concept of supremacy. You trying to be so complex that your missing the basic fundamentals of white (supremacist) ideology that has been present from the beginning of America to our present day. Your statements are basically arguing it's very existance.
A bold statement without finding....:cheeky: .. You're right, it wasn't to the degree it was accepted today, it was even fucking worse! in an exponential magnitude. Today countries wage terrirtorial wars and people complain to the UN when civilians are bombed. Back in the days countries ran through entire towns, raping and pillaging, and gutting people with swords. You think classism exists in a large part in America today? Try being a slave in ancient Egypt. Try being an aborigine in Australia, who until 1970 were deported as children so they wouldn't mix with the pure whites. Try being born in the servant class in India, or a woman in Pakistan. Try being a laborer's son in China. A statement without finding? Go home, son.
There were a great many countries that operated this way, in degrees far surpassing the US.
Have you even studied history? Do you know when the single largest massacre of black people pre-1850 occurred? It was when Shaka Zulu's favorite daughter died. Out of anger, he killed 40,000 lesser tribesmen from other tribes, slaves, and others.
Classism has existed since one man learned to kill another. To say that the United States is the most grievous example of classism is either purposeful eye-shutting or miseducation. The list of places where our classism is *docile*, even *friendly* in comparison is stupendous.
After you break it down into "lamens", could you then break it down further into "layman's", so even I could understand it?
Beep beep. Bob Barker is sending you home. She said that "the war wasn't being fought over slavery, but also over a degree of a rising classism." I'm sorry, I failed to state that it wasn't the original cause of the war...merely a major focal point once the war was underway...almost equivalent to the cause of the war. Let's all split hairs, shall we?
No, they did it for financial gain. A lot more rational than creating a lower class of undesirable to look down on. I'm sorry they didn't have access to PC buzzwords like "classism" back then. No one sits around and conspires to hate someone. Black people were hated and considered lower class on a larger scale. This required no effort.
No one gave them international kudos for oppressing Africans. It was a move of financial gain, not something unheard of at the time, and hardly the result of a vanity conspiracy. If you ask snobby rich people if seeing poor people makes them feel better, they respond "No, I would rather not see them at all." Slavery was not an intentional emotional onslaught or a large-scale psychic attack on black people, though that may have been the result. The civil war, and its detractors, had no idea what "racism" or "classism" was...they merely saw right and wrong. One side thought slavery was right, one side thought it wrong. No one creates a lower class to push themselves up, because that would instead drag the country down. This was known even to our ancestors. The ones who supported slavery simply didn't care.
Hardly. It exists today, but not with the same magnitude, relevance, or prevalence. And what about Hindu societies, where you cannot leave a certain caste? Are they religious supremacy ideologies? What about the few countries where slavery is still legal? Are they instilled in an owner-supremacy ideology? What about countries made up of conquered territories? Are they instilled with a Warlord supremacy ideology? I assume Taiwan is imbued with a "rice" supremacy ideology. The elements that characterize White supremacy as a salient, powerful force in society are either gone or dissipating. Inventing reasons "the man" stops the average Black person today and circumlocuting the problem with theories of oppression conspiracies are precisely the type of thing that continue to tie American Blacks with a victim mentality.
There were a great many countries that operated this way, in degrees far surpassing the US.
Have you even studied history? Do you know when the single largest massacre of black people pre-1850 occurred? It was when Shaka Zulu's favorite daughter died. Out of anger, he killed 40,000 lesser tribesmen from other tribes, slaves, and others.
Classism has existed since one man learned to kill another. To say that the United States is the most grievous example of classism is either purposeful eye-shutting or miseducation. The list of places where our classism is *docile*, even *friendly* in comparison is stupendous.
After you break it down into "lamens", could you then break it down further into "layman's", so even I could understand it?
Beep beep. Bob Barker is sending you home. She said that "the war wasn't being fought over slavery, but also over a degree of a rising classism." I'm sorry, I failed to state that it wasn't the original cause of the war...merely a major focal point once the war was underway...almost equivalent to the cause of the war. Let's all split hairs, shall we?
No, they did it for financial gain. A lot more rational than creating a lower class of undesirable to look down on. I'm sorry they didn't have access to PC buzzwords like "classism" back then. No one sits around and conspires to hate someone. Black people were hated and considered lower class on a larger scale. This required no effort.
No one gave them international kudos for oppressing Africans. It was a move of financial gain, not something unheard of at the time, and hardly the result of a vanity conspiracy. If you ask snobby rich people if seeing poor people makes them feel better, they respond "No, I would rather not see them at all." Slavery was not an intentional emotional onslaught or a large-scale psychic attack on black people, though that may have been the result. The civil war, and its detractors, had no idea what "racism" or "classism" was...they merely saw right and wrong. One side thought slavery was right, one side thought it wrong. No one creates a lower class to push themselves up, because that would instead drag the country down. This was known even to our ancestors. The ones who supported slavery simply didn't care.
Hardly. It exists today, but not with the same magnitude, relevance, or prevalence. And what about Hindu societies, where you cannot leave a certain caste? Are they religious supremacy ideologies? What about the few countries where slavery is still legal? Are they instilled in an owner-supremacy ideology? What about countries made up of conquered territories? Are they instilled with a Warlord supremacy ideology? I assume Taiwan is imbued with a "rice" supremacy ideology. The elements that characterize White supremacy as a salient, powerful force in society are either gone or dissipating. Inventing reasons "the man" stops the average Black person today and circumlocuting the problem with theories of oppression conspiracies are precisely the type of thing that continue to tie American Blacks with a victim mentality.
YOU ARGUED:
1: That there are more class-devided countries than the United States. (By the way, I don't know that I wouldn't pick every one of those instances before I endure what African slaves expierenced from being robbed of their home/family, the hopeless feeling of life as they traveled down the middle passage, and the suffering that began when they hit the shores of America).
THEN YOU ARGUED:
2: That the U.S. is *NOT* the most extreme case of classism the world has ever seen.
3: That I mis-spelled a word...?
4: Clarification of your error?
5: Supremacy in other countries and practices? We are talking about the prejudice in America, and I am refering to historical events/theories that took place in America, that would help explain how we got to this point.
ALL OF WHICH HAD *NOTHING* TO DO WITH THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD, THEREFORE THEY GO IN THE GARBAGE. WHEN YOU MAKE HUGE PARAGRAPHS IN RESPONSE TO A SINGLE LINE; A SINGLE LINE UNRELATED TO THE BIGGER PICTURE, IT MEANS SHIT TO ME.
NOW TO THE RELEVANCE:
I'm sure they did do it for financial gain, but what population stood to make money? The upperclass right? How is your average slave-owning white man going ot profit from having someone cook him dinner and clean house.
"No one sits around and conspires to hate someone."
The Klu Klux Klan? Peckerwoods, Skinheads, Nazi's? Are you serious, no one conspires to hate another person? I could name plenty more if you would like, that statement is beyond false.
1. If you ask snobby rich people that question, you would probably get that answer. It's easy for someone to say they would rather not see them at all, but with the enormous amount of money present in upper-class white society, doesn't it strike you as odd these very people do nothing about it?
2. Your right, they had no idea what "racism" or "classism" was, but they understood the concept of it, to devide peoples based on thier wealth, and to devide people based on their race. I'm not trying to say they know full well of what they were doing, I'm telling you that prejudice exists largely in part today because they did do it.
3. If no one creates a lower class to push themselves up, how do you explain the existance of an upper-class. However it did happen, the idea of classism must have existed.
I agree with you more than you can imagine, and this is one point I had trouble getting across to some African America's on this board. There is a fine line that seperates reasonability between the two races, as far as who is responsible for what. On the one hand you have an opressed class/race of humans that are more or less in the "ruins", as I like to put it. This is so because of the way history (slavery, civil rights era etc.) shaped the future. On the other hand you have a race of humans who must carry the burden of our ancestors, that being the "responsibility" of this lower class of people remaining in the gutter. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your saying that opressed races are slow to recoup from hostorical disaster because they place more focus and emphasism on why they are down and how it is so hard to get up; and not *HOW* they can get back up and make it better. I agree with you, but there is one very big factor that I cannot get over and that is African Americans did not choose the life they are forced to live, and although we may not be directly responsible for fixing the situation, we certainly cannot overlook the issue.
1: That there are more class-devided countries than the United States. (By the way, I don't know that I wouldn't pick every one of those instances before I endure what African slaves expierenced from being robbed of their home/family, the hopeless feeling of life as they traveled down the middle passage, and the suffering that began when they hit the shores of America).
THEN YOU ARGUED:
2: That the U.S. is *NOT* the most extreme case of classism the world has ever seen.
3: That I mis-spelled a word...?
4: Clarification of your error?
5: Supremacy in other countries and practices? We are talking about the prejudice in America, and I am refering to historical events/theories that took place in America, that would help explain how we got to this point.
ALL OF WHICH HAD *NOTHING* TO DO WITH THE TOPIC OF THIS THREAD, THEREFORE THEY GO IN THE GARBAGE. WHEN YOU MAKE HUGE PARAGRAPHS IN RESPONSE TO A SINGLE LINE; A SINGLE LINE UNRELATED TO THE BIGGER PICTURE, IT MEANS SHIT TO ME.
NOW TO THE RELEVANCE:
I'm sure they did do it for financial gain, but what population stood to make money? The upperclass right? How is your average slave-owning white man going ot profit from having someone cook him dinner and clean house.
"No one sits around and conspires to hate someone."
The Klu Klux Klan? Peckerwoods, Skinheads, Nazi's? Are you serious, no one conspires to hate another person? I could name plenty more if you would like, that statement is beyond false.
1. If you ask snobby rich people that question, you would probably get that answer. It's easy for someone to say they would rather not see them at all, but with the enormous amount of money present in upper-class white society, doesn't it strike you as odd these very people do nothing about it?
2. Your right, they had no idea what "racism" or "classism" was, but they understood the concept of it, to devide peoples based on thier wealth, and to devide people based on their race. I'm not trying to say they know full well of what they were doing, I'm telling you that prejudice exists largely in part today because they did do it.
3. If no one creates a lower class to push themselves up, how do you explain the existance of an upper-class. However it did happen, the idea of classism must have existed.
I agree with you more than you can imagine, and this is one point I had trouble getting across to some African America's on this board. There is a fine line that seperates reasonability between the two races, as far as who is responsible for what. On the one hand you have an opressed class/race of humans that are more or less in the "ruins", as I like to put it. This is so because of the way history (slavery, civil rights era etc.) shaped the future. On the other hand you have a race of humans who must carry the burden of our ancestors, that being the "responsibility" of this lower class of people remaining in the gutter. Correct me if I'm wrong, but your saying that opressed races are slow to recoup from hostorical disaster because they place more focus and emphasism on why they are down and how it is so hard to get up; and not *HOW* they can get back up and make it better. I agree with you, but there is one very big factor that I cannot get over and that is African Americans did not choose the life they are forced to live, and although we may not be directly responsible for fixing the situation, we certainly cannot overlook the issue.
"Whites look at Black people and see people who refuse to integrate without challenging, people who see themselves as first Black, then individuals."
Around 50 years ago blacks tried to intergrate and challenge "the system" but were killed, beaten, robbed, castrated and raped. When you say "whites look at blacks" which white people are you talking about?
"Look at White racism today. Alot of it is still the typical redneck bullshit, saying things like "n***** smell" and "fuck all g***s". But there is a new breed of white racism. Some of it is very thoughtful, and well laid out. Much of the new ideas hinge around creating a "white" identity and restoring and protecting "white" history, having a "white" culture and a "white" based ideal. Who might they have got that idea from?"
If you're implying these "new ideas" came from Afrikan Americans you are *WRONG*! If you're implying hitler I would say yes. If you're implying Albert Pike I would say yes. These ideas are not "new" they are quite old and go BEYOND the days of slavery. I have no problem with a person wanting "white" identity, "white" history, "white" culture or "white" based ideal. In america we see these things everyday. We see "white" identity, history, culture and ideas in our everyday lives. I *DO* have a problem with HOW one goes about achieving these goals and what is left out. I do have a problem with destroying black families, economics, education and spirituality so "white" can be "right".
Around 50 years ago blacks tried to intergrate and challenge "the system" but were killed, beaten, robbed, castrated and raped. When you say "whites look at blacks" which white people are you talking about?
"Look at White racism today. Alot of it is still the typical redneck bullshit, saying things like "n***** smell" and "fuck all g***s". But there is a new breed of white racism. Some of it is very thoughtful, and well laid out. Much of the new ideas hinge around creating a "white" identity and restoring and protecting "white" history, having a "white" culture and a "white" based ideal. Who might they have got that idea from?"
If you're implying these "new ideas" came from Afrikan Americans you are *WRONG*! If you're implying hitler I would say yes. If you're implying Albert Pike I would say yes. These ideas are not "new" they are quite old and go BEYOND the days of slavery. I have no problem with a person wanting "white" identity, "white" history, "white" culture or "white" based ideal. In america we see these things everyday. We see "white" identity, history, culture and ideas in our everyday lives. I *DO* have a problem with HOW one goes about achieving these goals and what is left out. I do have a problem with destroying black families, economics, education and spirituality so "white" can be "right".
White people in general.
I suppose I incorrently phrased my point. The comment (which I tend to agree with) has been made by others including Burke and Steele that much white racism today is less about a generalized hatred towards non-whites as much as dissatisfaction and angst at what is percieved to be the political attitudes of non-whites and their ideas of entitlement and civic responsibility.
I suppose I incorrently phrased my point. The comment (which I tend to agree with) has been made by others including Burke and Steele that much white racism today is less about a generalized hatred towards non-whites as much as dissatisfaction and angst at what is percieved to be the political attitudes of non-whites and their ideas of entitlement and civic responsibility.
your all wrong
theres one simple explanation for it all
Economic Equality
and our societies lack of it. . .
Two black guys walk into any business establishment
one wears a 1,000$ suit
the other dressed like any other guy on the street
who is gettin service???
apply this analogy to anything and it fits
theres one simple explanation for it all
Economic Equality
and our societies lack of it. . .
Two black guys walk into any business establishment
one wears a 1,000$ suit
the other dressed like any other guy on the street
who is gettin service???
apply this analogy to anything and it fits