A timely repost – food for thought at the end of 2014:
The following is based on “The Psychopathic Racial Personality and Other Essays” (1984) by the late Dr Bobby E. Wright, an American clinical psychiatrist who was based in Chicago:
The psychopathic racial personality is a psychological disorder common to most white people. Not just White Americans but Europeans and Arabs too. We can tell because they act in a psychopathic way towards blacks:
- self-centered
- disregard for the rights of others
- violent
- unfeeling
- almost complete absence of ethical and moral development
- make commitments they do not intend to keep
- get angry when their integrity is called into question
- unable to accept blame or learn from experience
- lack of discipline or respect for authority
- take advantage of blacks without any guilt, anxiety or threat to their self-esteem
- unable to love deeply leading to sexual inadequacy – leading to rape, castration and hypersexualization of blacks.
White behaviour towards blacks goes far beyond anything that can be accounted for in any other way.
Wright:
The sustained sexual atrocities committed against the Black race by the White race has no parallel in history and there is no scientific explanation except under the rubric of psychopathology.
The trouble with psychopaths is that most of them seem like nice people, at least at first. Unlike psychotics and neurotics, most can function in society, therefore few get sent to prisons or mental hospitals. And yet because they lack much of a conscience, they are capable of great evil and violence.
They are beyond the help of religion and science, which they just twist or overlook.
This disorder is what drives racism: “the oppression and exploitation of people because of their race.”
It even leads to black-on-black violence:
Historically, the European system has encouraged the killing of Blacks. Because Blacks have been led to believe that they are part of the psychopath’s system, they simply follow the practice.
Psychiatrists, both black and white, are taught to apply the medical model to their black patients. As Dr Samuel Cartwright did when he said runaway slaves suffered from a disease called drapetomania. He was not some nut – he was one of America’s leading experts on black disease in the 1800s. But because he assumed white society was healthy he saw blacks as screwed up.
What this means:
- Whites have no moral feelings that you can appeal to. They know the difference between right and wrong but just do not care.
- There is no known cure for psychopaths. The only successful treatments are imprisonment, radical psycho-surgery or death.
Therefore the only thing that will work for blacks is violence and revolution.
Wright:
… Chaka in the 1700s, Dessalines in the 1800s, Martin R. Delany in 1852, Henry Turner in 1880, Marcus Garvey in the 1920s, Malcolm X and H. Rap Brown in the 1960s, and Chancellor Williams in the 1970s. The answer to Blacks’ problems can be found in the works and lives of these Black heroes.
Thanks to Truthbetold for suggesting this post.
See also:
- The hearts of white people: the science
- How to become white – Thandeka’s take
- narcissistic personality disorder
- black love – blacks do not get off clean
- drapetomania
- Fanon
I second that thanks to Truthbetold. This mental state is even more visibly apparent in which as of late.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
Your comment is what Dr. Wright was talking about.
Rather than deal with the real issue–RACISM-you threw Farrakhan’s name (even though the standard white default is Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton).
to DEFLECT the conversation and the truth about what Dr. Wright said.
That is what SOCIOPATHS and PSYCHOPATHS do. They find a way to blame the victim or deny that they are victimizing someone because they feel no remorse for their crimes.
I’m not saying you are either one but it’s a FACT that whites collectively have committed and/or benefited from the crime of racism and in my experience, are GREATLY resentful and hostile ANY time a victim of racism calls it out.
Just out of curiosity, I’d like to pose a question to you.
Let’s assume Farrakhan– who is in his 70s – has experienced legal segregation, such as Whites-Only bathrooms, and all kinds of racist discrimination, humiliation and mistreatment of his black friends, family members, and himself, do you think Farrakhan is wrong for the things he says about American society?
LikeLike
@ sharinalr
Dr. Wright died four years after writing this book. Some believe he was murdered. I would not be surprised. Dr. Welsing lost her tenure at Howard University after she wrote the book, The Isis Papers.
When black people are punished for speaking their truth, the ones who punish them are more than likely, telling on themselves.
LikeLike
Trojan Pam
Honestly I would not remotely be surprised either. Truth frees you from the chain of lies that whites wish to strap us with.
“When black people are punished for speaking their truth, the ones who punish them are more than likely, telling on themselves.”—Greatly agree.
LikeLike
@ George
I did not call you a psychopath or sociopath. I don’t know you well enough to say that.
The reason I don’t advocate violence is simple. if I’m armed with a slingshot and my enemy has tanks and ballistic missiles, I’d be a fool to encourage violence.
HOWEVER, if my enemy has a long, long HISTORY of being bloodthirsty, merciless and violent not just toward me but all the people like me,
and this enemy has made it clear that they have no intention of changing their behavior and show no remorse, in spite of my attempts to coexist peacefully, what options would you suggest, George?
LikeLike
@ sharinalr
the really interesting part is — despite all the LIES about black people being “violent” — black people on average are actually are quite passive.
If we were as violent as some folks make us out to be, we’d be rioting in the streets non-stop, considering all the mistreatment we’ve endured in this country.
No matter what Farrakhan “advocates” who has he ever harmed? When’s the last time the Nation of Islam burned a cross or harmed or beat or choked or lynched a white person OR spit on a white child and called him or her a dirty name? Name ANY black “group” that has ever harmed a white person in the name of practicing their beliefs?
Blacks are often accused of “advocating” violence or being violent EVEN when we seldom practice it — except as individuals in the commission of a crime.
YET — we are the raging black inferno monsters, that strikes fear in the hearts of white people? Maybe, that is the reflection in their OWN MIRRORS looking back at them….
Speaking of raging violence, I don’t have the exact information but I read yesterday that there was another “Gardner” type police murder in NYC, an 18-year old black female who was suffocated to death while in police custody
I’d bet my last two paychecks that if black police were constantly shooting unarmed white teenagers, we would see what real violence looks like. In white face.
LikeLike
The common theme I get from many white commenters here is they can do it but we can not. Whites calling for race wars and white violence against blacks and other people of color is a mile long yet it crosses some line if one man/woman starts to call for violence against whites. We are expected to endure.
I observed this a great deal in the last weeks and whites took to the internet to say things like “let’s get this race war started” or “kill those n-word.” and they got several thumbs up and of the other whites to comment they ignored it until a black person commented to say “We going to kill you whites” then all of a sudden he was public enemy number 1.
My biggest beef with certain whites is they talk a good game about equality, but will sit and let an injustice happen with no remorse or care unless the injustice is happening to a white person. That is why this post really hammers home what I have witnessed with my own eyes.
LikeLike
“I think Farrakhan is wrong for encouraging violence & i think Bobby is wrong for concluding violence is the only answer.
I’m diametrically opposed to anyone who spreads ideas like these.”
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
What is more wrong and violent than Racism/White Supremacy?
You are diametrically opposed to logical thought. Rev Wright, Obama’s former pastor pegged Amerikkka correctly. There is something very defective in the hearts of white people.
LikeLike
@ Trojan Pam
“Maybe, that is the reflection in their OWN MIRRORS looking back at them….”—-I think that is exactly what it is. They project their own hateful nature onto black people. I have thought this was the case for sometime but was never sure. Though when you engage and talk with them enough very few if any with apply anything bad to themselves.
I also believe they fear blacks responding and acting in the way they have acted towards them. They assume the worse because they have done the worse.
LikeLike
@ sharinalr
I agree, there is a GREAT deal of anti-black hate-and-violence-mongering by whites all over the Internet (and all over the U.S.).
I have always maintained that this “nature” is the MAIN reason Obama was (s)elected, to create a BLACK SCAPEGOAT for the crimes of the white puppeteers who control him.
Because the white elite know what works when it comes to most of the white collective, that many are literally chomping at the bit to “get at” black people
Robert Jensen, a white professor at The University of Texas, wrote, “The Fears of White People”
check it out
LikeLike
Wake me up when you do the article on Dr. Francis Cress Welsing and her Cress Theory of Color Confrontation.
Thanx
zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
LikeLike
@Trojan Pam
“A final fear has probably always haunted white people but has become more powerful since the society has formally rejected overt racism: The fear of being seen, and seen-through, by non-white people. Virtually every white person I know, including white people fighting for racial justice and including myself, carries some level of racism in our minds and hearts and bodies. “—-This stood out to me. It reminds me of how whites respond in anger when called racist or other turns to highlight certain bias they have.
LikeLike
Terms* not turns.
LikeLike
@ George
White supremacy is the ULTIMATE violence and has caused more death and destruction than any single force on the planet.
I agree with the first part, that there is something defective in the hearts of those who practice white supremacy
but I don’t agree that a person who uses violence to defend themselves and their loved ones is “defective.”
if they’ve tried everything else and nothing has worked.
of course, this is a rhetorical argument since I do not advocate violence and have never physically harmed anyone
((knock wood))
LikeLike
@Thwack
Do you believe or agree with Dr. Welsing when she states that white people are the genetically defective descendants of albino mutants”?
LikeLike
@ sharina
it’s been my personal experience that people get angrier when you tell the truth on them than when you lie on them
LikeLike
@George Ryder
You seem pretty obsessed with this Farrakhan guy? Perhaps you can tell us when and where he said “violence is the only answer?”
LikeLike
@Sharina
Does Dr. Welsing actually use the term “defective” in her works?
LikeLike
@resw77
I am not sure. I actually just pulled a quote from wikipedia. I am curious on what all people know of her and her work.
LikeLike
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frances_Cress_Welsing
LikeLike
@Sharina
Right, I saw it there too. But that’s not a quote of hers. I’ve heard her speak, and read the Isis Papers a long time ago, but can’t recall the word “defective” being used. I don’t really know.
But the reason I bring that up is because it sounds disparaging and unscientific. Perhaps people are misquoting her to discredit her professional analysis?
LikeLike
@resw77
“Perhaps people are misquoting her to discredit her professional analysis?”—Unfortunately that is a great possibility. Do you know where I can view the Isis Papers?
LikeLike
@ resw77
I’ve listened to many interviews of Dr. Welsing and I’ve never heard her use the word “defective” in describing white people.
LikeLike
Just reading you people go back and forth. I’m from the UK. Quite racist here but not like it is in the States. I think the main problem I see is that your country allows guns which means that your police are sanctioned to kill. Things rarely get out of hand in the UK. Try to imagine if nobody had a gun from tomorrow in the States. Things wouldn’t be perfect but they would improve. As for the issue of white people being psychopathic…I think they act it because of power. When any group has power and money they usually oppress the ones that don’t. It’s about dominance. All groups of humans club together along racial or cultural/religious lines. It looks like white people have psychopathic tendencies and a lot of them are cold…but is it really just a by-product of hegemony over black people?
LikeLike
sharinalr
@resw77
“Perhaps people are misquoting her to discredit her professional analysis?”—Unfortunately that is a great possibility. Do you know where I can view the Isis Papers?
———————————————————————————————
This is why I suggest and support Abagond doing a dedicated article on Dr. Francis Cress Welsing and her Cress Theory of Color Confrontation.
We get stories, essays, songs, plays… about racism. But the only black person I know to have written a scientific THEORY of racism white supremacy; can’t get any friggin rotation?
BTW — her sister married the first black astronaut, Major Robert Lawrence, who died during a training flight in an F-104 in 1967. She told us a very interesting story regarding what they had to do to get his named on the NASA memorial to astronauts killed in the line of duty.
BTW– I doubt she used the word “defective”; either a white person intentionally chose that word to discredit her, or an ignorant black person projected their bias into the article.
LikeLike
I don’t see any other way to put it. It is a mental disorder wrapped in a mystery that there may never be any explanation for this kind of mass problem.
LikeLike
@Rosina,
I am an American living overseas in a place that does not allow private gun ownership & police by and large do not carry guns either. The difference is obvious – less than 0.2 gun homicides here per million people per year v. almost 400 in the USA. The USA is at constant war both domestically & internationally.
But Americans (usu whites) defend gun ownership like their life depended on it, requiring police to be armed also. But police more often than not use their guns against unarmed persons & call it “appropriate force”. What to do?
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
“I’m sure Farrakhan would agree with Bobby. Violence is the only answer.”
‘Sarcasm’ is one of the psychological disorders of psychopathic racial personality (PRP). This only means that a lot of white folks are in NEED of radical psycho-therapy.
LikeLike
@Jefe
I think that guns should be outlawed and ONLY when this happens will sanctioned murder of the citizens of the States be reduced dramatically. As I understand it’s written into the constitution this is unlikely to happen but I believe it will. Who in all honesty would imagine in 1980 that 28 years later the American people would elect a black man as president. As for racism it will only cease to exist when humankind become so mixed as to make outward physical differences indistinguishable. We are shallow and judge by appearances of the flesh.
LikeLike
Can we say that the ‘Perseus Syndrome’ is similar to psychopathic racial personality accept that it’s a psychological disorder common to most white men? However, it is contagious to men of other races.
Our African cultural-griot, Ashra Kwesi, calls it a “Western patriarchal hatred towards women.” The white man proudly presents his psychological disorder (Perseus Syndrome) to us in Greek mythology (named after Perseus, the Greek founder of Mycenae), advertisements, thrillers and horror movies:
http://img.scoop.it/KtNDpzCoVA8G5W3Y0RfZSTl72eJkfbmt4t8yenImKBVvK0kTmF0xjctABnaLJIm9
LikeLike
@ Rosa
Racial amalgamation will NOT cause racism/white supremacy to go into nonexistence. Many white supremacists date and marry non-white women. Old white supremacist Donald Sterling is a good example.
Another good example are the children that are birth products of Asian women and white men. With all due respect to Asians or people of Asian descent, some Eurasian people consider themselves ‘white’. Many of their white fathers are racist as hell. Unfortunately, many Asian-American college students who have white fathers bubble in ‘white’ on Ivy League college entry applications to avoid institutional racism, which is a powerful form of white racism/white supremacy. Bubbling in ‘white’ instead of ‘other’ will keep white racism in existence.
I’m not against race-mixing but just remember that race-mixing won’t solve anything, it’ll just disguise the new white supremacist’s phenotype.
LikeLike
@ Rosina
I apologize for typing in “Rosa” instead of Rosina. Once again, I apologize. Peace and blessings.
LikeLike
@Michael, hello and thank you. You have a nice way about you…Yes I agree that many mixed race people feel compelled to be ‘white’…and then there’s the issue of ‘passing’. I wonder though if it might be the genetic destiny of the human race to amalgamate though. Mixed race people (of all descriptions) often seem to have bestowed upon them good genes. I’m not of course saying that this is always the case but it can’t be ignored. Your thoughts are very welcome.
LikeLike
Sarcasm is the perfect counter to the absurd.
LikeLike
Michael Cooper
Can we say that the ‘Perseus Syndrome’ is similar to psychopathic racial personality accept that it’s a psychological disorder common to most white men?
—————————————————————————————
No.
Men are only responding to the natural “hardwired” attraction females have for males who can and will dominate and control them.
LikeLike
@ Michael and Kiwi
I agree. Though I understand why and where people get the false idea that race-mixing will fix racism. The idea is that if we are all the same color or mixed then one can not be discriminated on race because we will be the same.
The problem with this idea for me is genetics will still make one darker or lighter. No one will be the “same”.
LikeLike
@Rosina, re:
That is not going to happen, but I don’t think it is purely due to the reasons that Michael Cooper suggested.
For every society that has had extensive racial mixing,
– the phenotypes would not disappear – they are only recombined into new combinations.
– A new vocabulary is invented to replace what may have formerly been racial designations, eg, hair type, eye colour, skin tone,
– money and wealth have some impact on one’s “racial” classification for social purposes.
– marrying up or down is related to both wealth and to phenotypical characteristics (eg, skin tone)
Mexico is a mixture of European, Indigenous American, African and Asian, yet we see a form of colourism developed that attaches higher social value to European phenotypical traits. If you watch Mexican telenovelas, you might think Mexicans are of European descent with many blondes.
Colourism also entered into places such as the Philippines and Brazil and Trinidad and Venezuela.
However, once Mexicans are in the USA, they are “racialized”. Being multiracial has not stopped that.
Even in societies where the mixture is primarily European and African, and where most are a mixture of both, we see colourism playing a role in social stratification.
African-Americans are also a very racially mixed and diverse demographic. That has not stopped them from being racialized into a group.
Some of what the others said is playing a role too. White mothers of children with black fathers pushed to identify their kids as biracial instead of black. And “some” Eurasians may try to opt to identify as “white” at least socially.
On the other hand, since the 1990s, there has been some self-assertion by multiracial activists to embrace a multiracial identity.
It was not like that a half a century ago, before Loving v. Virginia and the old immigration quotas were repealed. When I was a young child I heard people say that they look forward to one day when everyone is “mixed” and race does not matter. But that was mostly said by non-whites who were weary of being treated like second class citizens. So —- that means that by marrying with whites, they looked forward to more integration, and eventually assimilation with whites. Well, we do see that today, but not with EVERYONE. Some are trying to assimilate more with white, some are not. But it will be mostly whites deciding who can be accepted socially as white.
LikeLike
@ George
Copy it there and I will delete it here.
LikeLike
@Sharina
You’d have to buy it on Amazon, Barnes & Noble or go to a “black bookstore.”
@thwack
I’d agree that Abagond should do a post on Welsing.
As to the term “defective,” I’ve only seen it used on Wikipedia and in message boards. Not saying that she never use the word in her writings, but IF not, then it’s another reason to distrust Wikipedia as a source of factual information. It’s clear that biased individuals liberally edit many entries without proper citations.
@Rosina
The notion that UK is not as racist as the US is complete bull. It was not that long ago that the UK was dealing with riots as a result of police brutality against blacks and S. Asians (much more heated and violent than the recent protests in the US).
And 30% of Britons believe they harbour racial prejudice, especially in England. http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/may/27/-sp-racism-on-rise-in-britain.
That’s not much different from the number of Americans who admit to the same.
LikeLike
George Ryder said:
“Farrakhan just did a speech encouraging violence & Bobby says it’s the only answer. I’m just putting 2 & 2 together.
I think Farrakhan is wrong for encouraging violence & i think Bobby is wrong for concluding violence is the only answer.”
___________________________________________
This is where blatant white hypocrisy comes in. When it comes to non-white people, “peace is power” – pacifist means of countering injustice is not only encouraged, but pushed as the ONLY reasonable means of combat against tyranny and terrorism. Non-whites are encouraged to imitate the likes of Gandhi, Martin Luther King, Booker T. Washington, Frederick Douglass, Winnie Mandela – all of which were great men and women. But where the hypocrisy comes in – is that people such as Nat Turner, Robert F. Williams, Ho Chi Minh, Toussaint L’Overture are either covered in historically neutral terms (at best) and as terrorists at worst. Think of white heroes – are any of them pacifists in the face of tyranny?? George Washington, Abraham Lincoln, Churchill, Eisenhower, Thomas Jefferson, Andrew Jackson. The answer is a resounding no. When darker people fight – its viewed as savagery. Look at what is going on in the so-called “middle east” right now. They’re deemed as savages for taking up arms against injustice. When whites fight, not only is it c considered noble, its the ONLY WAY to protect their (warped) perception of justice Jimmy Carter, still considered a leader of sorts – is viewed as a coward by whites by trying to use diplomacy instead of an iron fist during the Iranian hostage crisis.
I have to postscript that this is merely a racist discrepancy I’ve noticed in the behavior of white people – not any sort of advocacy of anything.
LikeLike
@mrtekknowledge
I recently took the time to read some of abagond’s old posts and it comes back to the idea that white really don’t view and process information the way others do. I use to believe it was from experience with black people, but some of the most emotionally void individuals seemed to have grown up around blacks by their own account and still shared the same views as those that did not.
I agree with you in that as blacks or any person of color we are expected to be calm and peaceful even in the face of being beaten or murdered. We are expected to take whatever mistreatment and apply none to whites. The common fear tactic I hear from whites is “You will be treated how you act” this basically ignores that regardless of how one acts blacks are still being mistreated and still posed this double standard of do not protect yourself. Do not fight back.
I wish white people would tell me how two white men shot up a store and were simply arrested and not shot dead. Where is this treated the way you act statements now?
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
In terms of violence I knew exactly what Minister Farrakhan was saying. The Minister does NOT advocate violence in any shape or form. Advocating violence would contradict the NOI and its teachings. However, as the Minister explains it, if an aggressor or a group of aggressors act violently towards us we’re in our GOD-GIVEN RIGHT to return the “favor”.
George, my people tried nonviolence and it just does NOT work in a country that glorifies and promotes violence. In fact, nonviolence nearly gave MLK an earlier death:
(Above) Nothing has changed with racist white policemen. According to most whites (during the civil rights era), cops were “heroes” for arresting Dr. Martin Luther King, a nonviolent man who was accused of being a communist by people who were affected by psychopathic racial personality (PRP).
(Above) Dr. Martin Luther King pictured in his hospital bed following a violent stabbing from a white woman who was affected by psychopathic racial personality (PRP).
LikeLike
@Michael Cooper
Thank you very much for further explaining what Minister Farrakhan said. I do not follow him and have only recently heard of him. Uncle Milton pointed him out as citing violence in another thread and because I generally believe him I never questioned the validity of it (my mistake).
I fully understand what he means as I have asked this very question. At what point are black people to protect themselves?
LikeLike
biff
However, even if you spend more money on the black schools than the white schools, for some reason the measured difference doesn’t go away
——————————————————————————————-
Here is the white paradox: white people claim white children are smart because of high IQ; at the same time they guarantee all children receive a white supremacist education. In other words, their careful, dare I say OBSESSIVE control of the curriculum betrays a lack of confidence in the higher IQ of white children.
If they are high IQ it shouldn’t matter they get taught they are vectors of pathology right?
I can reduce any white child’s IQ if I write the text books. Matter of fact, put me in charge of education and I could get white children to kill themselves AND each other.
Then we can all watch biff’s ears turn red when I say “even if you spend more money on white children, for some reason their pathology doesn’t go away”
LikeLike
I see that a two year old boy accidently shot his mother today in the US…I will maintain what I say about the US having a higher murder rate than the UK. I also think that this means that racism becomes something which is more likely to be acted out with catastrophic results on the streets where all police officers will carry guns. Most people harbour racist views to some extent, be it very little or extremely. Yes that might include you and I and everyone else. Guns mixed with racism equals total destruction. There are many things which I admire about your country. However as I value my safety I’m happy to live in the relative safety of knowing that in Britain we are very very unlikely to be on the receiving end of gunfire.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
Everyone has a right to defend his or her RACE, too!
“I seem to recall something being said along the lines of burning our country to the ground.”
Minister Farrakhan’s words are always twisted up by the Jewish-controlled media. In fact, these white demons (yes, I said it!) will play a one or two-minute clip of his video instead of playing the video in its entirety. The Minister gives many view points in his speeches. He’s not saying that a person or people should go in the streets and create violence or burn down cities. He defends the victims, which so happen to be the people who are losing young male children, monthly.
George, you seem like a bright guy – do what any reasonable or open-minded person does, that is, watch a person’s video from start to finish or listen to his or her entire message.
LikeLike
@Rosina
Your words are kinder than mine. I can’t seem to see past America’s hypocrisy.
LikeLike
@ Rosina
“Guns mixed with racism equals total destruction.”
You’re absolutely right. I would enhanced it by saying that guns mixed with racism and ignorance equal total destruction. Racism is a form of ignorance and ignorance is a form of racism–whether it is White/Black/Arab/Indian/East Asian/Latino racism or internalized racism.
But let’s NOT forget that there would be NO America if it weren’t for the destructive combination of guns and racism. My question to you and any other commenter: Are we centuries too late with these words, like ours?
LikeLike
@ Rosina and sharinalr
It’s commenters, like George Ryder (no disrespect to the guy), that admire and defend countries that were produced by the destructive combination of guns and racism, right?
The world needs to keep it 100, there’s a lot of white and non-white people that admire and defend America, Australia, Israel, etc.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
“There is still hope.” Tell it to “Messy” Jesse Jackson. “Hope” is another form of dope, it’s bad for your mental health – we, Blacks, know that from our 400-year experience in the “New World”.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
“What about racism mixed with nuclear bombs?”
Was that a question asked at the ‘Ethnic Race Coalition’ because I (as a Black man) was NOT invited.
No Black African nation has ever mixed racism and nuclear bombs. I guess Black folks have too much respect for God’s green earth.
LikeLike
If whites have “psychopathic racial personality” then why is most violent interracial crime committed by blacks?
LikeLike
Michael Cooper
“The world needs to keep it 100, there’s a lot of white and non-white people that admire and defend America, Australia, Israel, etc.”—I agree.
LikeLike
@ Big Momma
Seriously. Give me the links to these “most violent interracial crime committed by blacks”. I’ll definitely click on them. Not only that, I’ll return the favor with the most violent interracial crime committed by whites from 1500 AD to the present. Let’s get started.
LikeLike
“is that a good answer?”
I said “interracial” not “intraracial”. Besides, the white homicide rate has been lower than the black rate since data has been kept. The white on black homicide rate has been particularly low. Whites rarely choose black victims. Either way, it’s hard to make a case that the black homicide rate is a result of white influence when the white homicide rate is and has been so much lower.
“Not only that, I’ll return the favor with the most violent interracial crime committed by whites from 1500 AD to the present. Let’s get started.”
I’m sure you’d love to use crimes committed by those long dead to justify violent interracial crime today. That’s the kind of thing someone with a ‘psychopathic racial personality’ would do.
LikeLike
@Rosina
Guns are not the only way to kill people. And despite your country’s gun ban in1997, murders in the UK have increased. Murders in the US have declined since then despite increased gun.
Of course, racists don’t need guns to kill people. One can use knife, as many do in Britain, or nooses as they have done in the Americas for centuries.
LikeLike
correction: “…despite increased gun” access.
And of course Eric Garner wasn’t murdered with a gun…
LikeLike
@ Big Momma
I really don’t have to go back to the 16th and 17th centuries to justify “violent interracial crime today”. That’s too easy. Hell, back in those days, excuse me, back in those centuries that’s all white folks did was practiced violent interracial crime, right? But again, that’s too easy to bring up.
I grew up in South-Central L.A. (or what is now South L.A.) where the Crips and Bloods reside and originated. In fact, my older cousin is a former Eleven-Eight (118th St) East Coast Blocc Crip gang member. Another older cousin of mine (on my mom’s side) is the creator of the One-Trey-Nine (139th St) Mafia Lane Piru (Blood) gang leader from Compton (CPT), fortunately his banging days are over. These cousins of mine have violent stories to tell and NOT one white person is in these violent stories.
Although I never banged I GREW UP around the heavily gang-infested culture. None of the Crips and Bloods I know killed or thought about killing a white person. Why is that? Crips and Bloods are embedded with internalized racism, which is a deadly form of self-hatred. Unfortunately, these Black men are programmed to kill one another. The only time Crips and Bloods thought about killing whites is when the 1992 L.A. Rebellion jumped off. They united for about four months until undercover cops ended it. In Watts, the gang truce lasted for about four years.
Just as Whites rarely choose black victims, Blacks rarely choose white victims. When a White person in the the South Bay area (a predominantly white region in L.A. county) sees Crip or Blood graffiti on the wall he or she has NO fear because the White person knows that Crips and Bloods are programmed to kill each other. On the flip side, when a Black person sees a swastika (oh yes, we still have swastikas on walls in Cali) on a wall or school or park bench table in a White or Black area whites have NO fear at all but Blacks have to be mindful of the traditional hate symbol.
In major cities across the country the white homicide rate is relatively lower than the Black homicide. I can definitely speak for the cities of California. But the mass killing rate among Whites is much higher than the mass killing rate of Blacks and Latinos combined. In fact, Black and Latino people go after targets or suspected targets. Blacks or Browns don’t do the massacre thing. I don’t have to bring up the mass murder rampage near UC Santa Barbara last spring to justify white mass killings.
Anyway, you can bring it and I’ll bring it too – and some.
LikeLike
@Big Momma
What’s “psychopathic racial personality” is your use of interracial murder statistics, as if they are relevant to this subject matter. It’s almost as if you use the same script as Fox News. Whenever the topic of racism, racially motivated crime or police brutality against blacks is mentioned, immediately your first response is black murder statistics.
Most interracial murders are NOT officially determined to be racially motivated, FYI, and black murderers are much more likely to kill other blacks than whites, by far.
So since you’re are so eager to invoke crime statistics, why not focus on hate crimes that are racially motivated? That ‘s much more relevant than “interracial” murders. But that would require you to face the fact that blacks are much much more likely than whites to be victims of racially motivated hate crimes.
LikeLike
@ resw77
Well said.
Whites who are affected by PRP are believes in the lie.
The lie:
Black people kill Whites more than whites kill Blacks.
Black men rape white women.
Trayvon Martin was a thug.
Richard Sherman is a thug.
Michelle Obama is a man.
Whites rarely choose Black victims.
Black people are genetically inferior.
Blacks are not part of the human evolution.
The ‘little white lie’ is very COMICAL!
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
“It’s about proximity.”
OK, please explain why Black people did NOT kill each other during slavery? Proximity and plantation can go hand in hand.
LikeLike
@Michael Cooper
Can whites don’t rape black women fit into that as well?
LikeLike
@ sharinalr
“Can whites don’t rape black women fit into that as well.”
Most certainly yes.
Mores lies:
White men don’t rape Black women.
Whites care about Africans.
Whites love humans over dogs and cats.
Whites don’t reward police officers for killing unarmed Black men.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
You’re absolutely right, whites-on-white violence is NOT a form of self-hatred.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
No big deal, a white man’s BEST friend is a dog. In Fiji, it’s the tortoise. In India, it’s the cow.
LikeLike
@ George Ryder
There’s absolutely NOTHING wrong with your family fighting for their country. Many people in America thank veterans, like your grandparents and my uncles, for protecting their freedom.
In terms of black-on-black violence 75% of it is from internalized racism.
“I assume you believe blacks never killed blacks until the white man taught them.”
George, I was NOT born the day Eric Garner was killed by a racist White cop and I say this out of respect to the Garner family. Blacks have killed other Blacks before the White man knew that the world was round. But even after the White man learned that the world wasn’t flat Blacks killed other Blacks, it was NOT because of ignorance or self-hatred.
Heard of Shaka – King of the Zulus?
Shaka did NOT wait for the White man to start killing other Blacks (Africans). Like commanding General George Washington, Shaka killed for a purpose. He wanted the best military in the world.
Heard of Ratu (Sir) Seru Epenisa Cakobau – Tui Viti (King of Fiji)?
Tui Cakobau did NOT wait for the white man to start killing other Blacks (Fijians). Like commanding General Ulysses Grant, Cakobau killed for a purpose. He wanted a kingdom he could call his own.
LikeLike
“None of the Crips and Bloods I know killed or thought about killing a white person. Why is that? Crips and Bloods are embedded with internalized racism, which is a deadly form of self-hatred. Unfortunately, these Black men are programmed to kill one another.”
Anecdotes aren’t evidence of general behavior. Since you ask, I’d say drug gangs target each other to eliminate competitors from their turf. Since whites are rarely in competition for drug turf there’s no reason for gangs to target them. Besides, studies show blacks have the highest self-esteem of any group. So I doubt black on black homicide has anything to do with self-hatred.
“Just as Whites rarely choose black victims, Blacks rarely choose white victims.”
Blacks murder whites at twice the rate whites murder blacks. Since there are about 6 times as many whites as blacks this means the black on white murder rate is more than 10 times as high as the white on black murder rate. Clearly, black on white homicide isn’t as rare as the reverse.
“In major cities across the country the white homicide rate is relatively lower than the Black homicide.”
Not just in America but around the world.
“But the mass killing rate among Whites is much higher than the mass killing rate of Blacks and Latinos combined.”
One might think so because white mass shooters get more media attention and websites portray mass shooting as a white phenomenon. If you look the shooters up you’ll find the mass shooting rate for whites is actually lower than for blacks. Surprisingly, asians have the highest rate of mass shooters at several times the national average.
“Anyway, you can bring it and I’ll bring it too – and some.”
Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to discuss these important public safety issues.
LikeLike
@ Big Momma
To repeat what resw77 said:
“So since you’re are so eager to invoke crime statistics, why not focus on hate crimes that are racially motivated? That ‘s much more relevant than “interracial” murders. But that would require you to face the fact that blacks are much much more likely than whites to be victims of racially motivated hate crimes.”
LikeLike
@ resw77
The Cress Welsing post is in the works. It should be up by Saturday.
She does use the word “defective” in “The Isis Papers”. Here on page 23:
The bolding is mine.
LikeLike
@ Abagond
Not at all. There’s some subjectivity in homicides as far as self defense vs murder. But they’re fairly objective in the sense that you generally either have a dead body or you don’t. It’s not so clear cut with “hate crimes” because one is being asked to presume motive and what extent bias played in the commission of the crime. It’s up to police and the prosecutor’s discretion whether they add hate crime charges. This discretion makes it subjective and political.
Perhaps comparing hate crime data from various states will give us some indication how subjective and political it really is? Only Hawaii has simply opted out of the program, and New Jersey didn’t bother to send any information for 2012 – the latest year for which data is available. Maybe we can compare hate crime data from states that did send data? Alabama’s 4.7 million people produced only 6 hate crimes, whereas Kentucky’s 4.3 million were guilty of 194. Texas, with 25 million people, reported only 52 hate crimes, while Tennessee, with only 6.3 million racked up 316. Thus hate crimes run from a low of 0.13 per 100,000 population in Alabama to a high of 11.97 per 100,000 in the District of Columbia — a 92-fold difference. lols
But, wait, it gets even better! Atlanta reported no hate. In fact, you’ll be happy to learn that all 2.4 million people who live in Cobb, DeKalb, and Fulton Counties are completely free of hate. The 2.5 million Floridians who live in Miami-Date County and the 1.8 million in Broward County were equally hate free. God bless them! The 1.3 million people of Hillsborough County, which contains Tampa, were just as fortunate, as were the 900,000 North Carolinians who live in the county that contains Raleigh and the 780,000 people of San Mateo County, California. Let’s all join hands and sing “Kumbaya!” New Orleans had only two hate crimes, and Philadelphia’s population of 1.5 million produced only 11. Bless their hearts. At least they’re trying, right? However, Seattle, Washington (population 627,000; 85 hate crimes) and Lexington, Kentucky (population 302,000; 41 hate crimes) are, according to this report, some of the most hateful places in America, with per capita hate-crime rates that are 19 times that of Philadelphia, 26 times that of Chicago, and 85 times that of Baltimore. Do you believe that? Me neither.
LikeLike
@Abagond
Thanks for the clarification.
@Big Momma
“But they’re fairly objective in the sense that you generally either have a dead body or you don’t.”
First, the only objectivity in a death is the death and often (if professionally determined), the method killed. A police/detective ruling or not ruling a death a homicide is often subjective, as well as naming a murder SUSPECT, a word that means person “thought” or “believed” (not known) to be guilty.
So classifying hate crimes, even blatant ones, e.g., involving vandalism with racial epithets, is no more subjective than police ruling deaths as homicides and/or determining the race of murder SUSPECTS.
Second, the lack of hate crime data from CERTAIN police departments has no bearing on the actual statistics compiled by the FBI nationwide, which clearly show more than half of all hate crimes reported are committed against blacks, as much as you are trying to dodge the fact that most classified hate crimes are against blacks, and whites are least likely to be victims of hate crimes.
And third, what’s amazing is that you admonish hate crime data because it’s incomplete, but are citing irrelevant interracial murder statistics despite the fact that 35% of all murders go unsolved. On one hand you’re basing your argument on incomplete interracial murderers, and on the other hand dismissing hate crime data because it’s incomplete.
Surely you see your own double standard, or should we just consider it a symptom of “PRP”?
LikeLike
@resw77
Regarding your response to Rosina:
CONGRATULATIONS! You have used the classic Straw Man argument.
(https://abagond.wordpress.com/glossary/)
“straw man argument – where someone tries to destroy your argument by bringing up a different argument that sounds kind of like yours and then destroys that.”
How did that happen? 😮 Well, just look:
Argument #1
Rosina’s argument: Homicide rates are much higher in the USA than UK due to proliferation of guns.
Your rephrasal of her argument: Homicides increased in the USA due to gun ownership but UK’s homicide rates decreased after the ban.
You tear down the alternate (incorrect) argument.
Classic straw man. You have not addressed her argument at all.
The homicide rate in the UK is still about 1/5 of the USA. Is it due to banning gun ownership? Actually, looking only at statistics, it is inconclusive. But you certainly did not disprove it.
By the way, I checked. UK homicide rates increased somewhat after the ban, but dropped to an even lower level afterwards. What statistics are you using?
how the murder rate has fallen The Telegraph (UK)
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/9411649/Graphic-how-the-murder-rate-has-fallen.html
Argument #2
Rosina’s argument: Guns and racism are a lethal combination.
Your rephrasal of her argument: Racists often become killers with a gun in their hands, which is unlikely if guns are banned.
You tear down that argument by mentioning that racists can kill using other lethal methods, even without guns.
AGAIN, Classic straw man. Her argument is left untouched while you address a different argument (despite how similar it looks).
To be real, the other methods do not produce as many homicides. A man with a knife can kill at most 3-4 people entering a crowded public place (school, cinema, shopping mall, public transportation) and maybe injure a dozen people. A man with a gun can kill 30-40 in one fell swoop and injure dozens of others.
You can kill someone with a gun from 15m away. Very difficult to do with a knife or other weapon (unless you are an excellent archer.)
Sure, in places where guns are banned, the other methods will be more common. Where I live in HK, it is more common to commit suicide by jumping off of buildings (or from upper storey windows). The rate of homicide by pushing people out of buildings might be higher here, even than in New York. But it might be because it is a cheap, easily available method in the city with the most skyscrapers in the world, nearly double that of the next city (ie, New York City). More people live or work above the 30th floor in HK than in any city in the world.
But in NY, with the largest subway system in the world, there are more murders caused by pushing people on the tracks of an oncoming train. Many of those are racially motivated. But even that might be due to not blocking off tracks to keep people from entering them. Most modern subway systems have barriers erected in front of the tracks that only open when a train’s doors open.
To sum up, you might have some correct information hidden in your retort somewhere, but it completely missed the mark of Rosina’s argument, ie, a straw man argument. I am not saying that she was 100% correct in her assertion, but your argument did not address it at all.
LikeLike
@Jefe
“Actually, looking only at statistics, it is inconclusive. But you certainly did not disprove it.”
If her argument was that “Homicide rates are much higher in the USA than UK due to proliferation of guns,” then not only has that not been proven, but it ignores the the fact that UK had a lower homicide rate than the US before UK’s gun ban. My throwing in the fact that murders in the UK increased dramatically the 5 years after the gun ban while decreasing in the US during the same period further discredits her unfounded argument.
If her second argument that “Guns and racism are a lethal combination” were true, then it’s quite reasonable to conclude that ANY weapon and racism are a lethal combination, and yes, that directly addresses her argument.
Your statement, “To be real, the other methods do not produce as many homicides” simply moves the goal post, and can easily be countered with the fact that there are also many ways to kill large groups of people beyond guns, such as bombs, biochemical attacks, hijackings, etc. etc.
In other words, your point, if there is one, is completely moot.
LikeLike
To kill with a knife or hand to hand combat usually takes more forethought. It’s more difficult than to kill with a gun, which is impersonal. One could kill someone with a gun and have not a mark on him or herself. The two year old who shot his mother shows that guns are lethal items to have in a home because they are so easy to use. It doesn’t even have to be intentional as in that case.
I deeply pity and will pray for anyone who cannot see that guns are linked with increased rates of homicide and accidental death. Don’t just compare the states to the UK
LikeLike
*to get a truly accurate picture compare all countries where gun ownership is legal with ones with ones which it is not.
LikeLike
@resw77
I was not trying to prove or disprove Rosina’s assertion. Your argument did neither. My point was that you were using a straw man argument.
This is pure straw man.
It doesn’t discredit anything. The same thing happened in Australia – an increase in homicide rates immediately following the ban, followed by a larger decrease.
Her argument *may* be unfounded, but your straw man argument does nothing to discredit it either.
I read many articles about this phenomenon about the effect of banning gun ownership (ie, leads to a temporary increase, followed by a much larger decrease), but I have to look for it. There are many studies which explain why there is a temporary increase immediately after a ban, yet still manages to reduce gun violence in the long run. I don’t have it at the tip of my finger, but maybe I could look for it.
Oh yes, of course. But that does not discredit her argument. If anything, it supports it. and the “any weapon” argument is also a straw man as she was talking about guns.
Perhaps a bit moot. The point was to show that your point was moot.
Admittedly, there is more to reducing gun violence than to banning guns. I think US has a higher tendency to use lethal violence in general, but the fact that the UK started with a lower level of lethal gun violence in no way discredits the assertion that banning guns could lead to reduced gun violence in the USA, perhaps even more dramatically than it did in the UK (since it is starting at a higher level to begin with).
LikeLike
@Rosina
“To kill with a knife or hand to hand combat usually takes more forethought.”
That is your opinion, and an unfounded one.
“I deeply pity and will pray for anyone who cannot see that guns are linked with increased rates of homicide and accidental death.”
I pity anyone who cannot see that guns are not the cause of increased rates of homicide. And there are many examples of places that have enacted gun bans and gun control laws and have seen homicide rates increase, just as there are examples of places with lax gun laws with low homicide rates.
@Jefe
“Your argument did neither…and the “any weapon” argument is also a straw man as she was talking about guns”
For as much as you’ve used the term “straw man argument” I think you’ve demonstrated that you don’t really understand what it is. My statement about “any weapon” was not meant to disprove her statement, if you read it, it was to complement it. I never made the argument that guns are not the preferred method of killing, I simply said they were not the only method, which is 100% true.
So I’m not really sure what your point is.
LikeLike
“So classifying hate crimes, even blatant ones, e.g., involving vandalism with racial epithets, is no more subjective than police ruling deaths as homicides and/or determining the race of murder SUSPECTS.”
You call petty vandalism and racial epithets “blatant hate crimes”. I call them minor. In fact, they’re so minor the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report doesn’t even count them. Insulting someone might suggest motive for a serious crime. But it’s absurd to consider it a crime in itself. Bad manners perhaps. But does it rise to the level of rape, murder and aggravated assault? I don’t think so. Yet such minor incidents make up more than 3/4 of “hate crimes”. It’s hard to take that seriously. The nature of an insult may not be subjective but Whether someone is charged with a crime for saying it certainly is. Particularly when the standard advises that bias must be a substantial component in order to do so. Two people get into a heated argument over a parking spot and exchange racial epithets. Was bias a substantial component of the incident? That’s pretty subjective.
“Second, the lack of hate crime data from CERTAIN police departments has no bearing on the actual statistics compiled by the FBI nationwide”
Sure it does. Some of the largest, most violent and diverse cities (known for interracial violence and racism) didn’t even report hate crimes. Among those who did, the numbers were too wildly disparate to be credible. Clearly, there’s a lack of consistency at best and a great deal of subjectivity and politicization at worst.
“And third, what’s amazing is that you admonish hate crime data because it’s incomplete, but are citing irrelevant interracial murder statistics despite the fact that 35% of all murders go unsolved. ”
A third of “hate crimes” go unsolved too. But there’s a big difference between a typical homicides and hate crimes. Hate crimes are often faked to push an agenda. I’m sure we can both think of several that turned out to be hoaxes. Still, that’s a completely different thing than whole states and police departments who fail to report. Not that they’d be above scrutiny if they did. Not only for the reasons given above but because of the discrepancy between hate crime figures and interracial violence figures are so great. For example, any given black is 38 times more likely to commit a violent crime against someone white as the reverse. But only twice as likely to commit a hate crime? That’s not realistic and, like I said, strongly indicates a lack of consistency at best and a lot of subjectivity and politicization at worst.
Now that I’ve made my points, I’ll give you the last word. Have at it.
LikeLike
@Big Momma
“You call petty vandalism and racial epithets “blatant hate crimes”.”
No, that’s not what I said. I suggested “vandalism WITH racial epithets” is a blatant example of a hate crime, in response to your comment that hate crimes were so subjective. Does it really take much analysis to conclude that someone spray painting a racial epithet on someone’s house or burning a cross in their yard is a hate crime, but the legal definition?
“In fact, they’re so minor the FBI’s Uniform Crime Report doesn’t even count them. ”
The Uniform Crime Report doesn’t include ANY property crime, but that has nothing to do with the fact that they are crimes that are reported to and collected by FBI.
“But does it rise to the level of rape, murder and aggravated assault?”
FYI, hate crimes encompass lots of crimes including rape, murder and aggravated assault.
“Some of the largest, most violent and diverse cities (known for interracial violence and racism) didn’t even report hate crimes”
Some, but not all or even most, for that matter. New York City, the largest by far and one of the most diverse cities in the world reports hate crimes, so does LA, the second largest city, etc etc. I guess it’s another attempt of yours to ignore the fact that based on the statistics we actually have, whites are least likely to be victims of hate crimes, and blacks are most likely to be victims by far.
“A third of “hate crimes” go unsolved too.”
Apples and oranges. 100% of hate crime victims’ race is reported. Only 65% of murderers’ race is known.
“For example, any given black is 38 times more likely to commit a violent crime against someone white as the reverse.”
Irrelevant and incorrect. Most blacks are not criminals and therefore are not likely at all to commit a violent crime against a white person. Black criminals may be more likely, by the mere virtue of being more likely to be minorities in the communities where they live than white people.
LikeLike
I recently came across a news story that is a perfect example of what Dr. Wright was talking about. It also illustrates how lawlessness is encouraged among the white population.
There are many, many instances where white lawbreakers are treated with extreme leniency by the court and police systems, from corrupt bankers and politicians to the everyday person. While blacks are given harsh treatment even for minor offenses, and make no mistake, whites know AND expect to be treated better, no matter how much they protest otherwise.
That says to me that sociopathic tendencies are the norm, not the exception..
W.E.B. Dubois wrote about this in his 1935 book, “Black Reconstruction in America” in regard to white lawlessness:
“The police were drawn from their ranks, and the courts, dependent on their votes, treated them with such leniency as to encourage lawlessness.”
—
The link below is a prime example of what blacks are still experiencing eveb though his book was written almost 90 years ago (!)
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/04/racism-and-vigilante-justice-in-pearland-texas/
Undeniably, PURE sociopathic and possibly psychopathic behavior in regards to black people, even to our black children (!)
LikeLike
@ Big Momma
It’s NO need to type in your replied quotes. You’re coming from the heart and a hard one at that.
Crimes that Blacks commit are the common ones that Whites, like yourself, love to blabber about. Street crimes (robbery and cheap narcotic drug dealing) are very minor league compared to the types of crime that Whites commit.
Some Blacks (certainly NOT all) do rob people’s homes, stores, markets, and banks but so do some Whites. But one thing that I can surely say is that Blacks do NOT invite their immediate family members to be part of home or bank robbery.
http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/headlines/2012/11/father-son-and-daughter-arrested-in-bank-robberies/
Here’s a few of the many crimes that Whites, like yourself, overlook:
http://www.wptz.com/news/vermont-new-york/plattsburbh/pair-caught-stealing-from-grocery-store/27413568
http://www.wbrz.com/news/mother-father-arrested-in-front-of-children/
http://youbentmywookie.com/wtf/face-off-white-robber-turns-black-to-rob-banks-8794
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/news/news/cops-woman-startled-by-glove-wearing-teen-in-her-k/ngQyq/
Oh, by the way, leave Asian-Americans out of your rhetoric. This is between Black and White people. If you strike back with me using Blacks and Latinos (combined) as less likely to committing mass killings then check yourself because they’re Blacks who are Latinos as well, which you already know.
LikeLike
@Trojan Pam
That woman is purely sick.
LikeLike
@ Abagond, fellow commenters and trolls
Happy 2015!
LikeLike
Thank you! Same to you.
LikeLike
@ sharina
To our minds (and value system) we might think she was “sick” but it that was true, then we should assume that the predominantly white female jury was “sick” too for letting Zimmerman get away with murder? What about the police who let her get away with it? Are they “sick,” too?
or are they simply behaving in a sociopathic fashion because this behavior is the FUEL that runs the white supremacist system of privilege and power?
By my definition she is a sociopath, since I’m pretty sure she knew exactly what she was doing and was pretty confident she’d get away with it–and she was right.
And I would not be surprised if she went home in a rage over being accosted by the police for such a “minor” matter (nearly killing a nig child) — and I bet her neighbors and friends and family admired her courage for “keeping the neighborhood safe” from little black demons.
Are they all sick — OR is it a sign of sociopathic tendencies?
I grew up in Chicago, and it was the NORM for so-called “law-abiding” whites to chase us out of their neighborhoods and I was a girl and had absolutely never broken any laws or damaged anyone’s property but I was send as a invader, not just by youth, but by GROWN PEOPLE who considered themselves “law-abiding” people.
None of these people would be classified as clinically insane or sick. They were just doing what folks do..
LikeLike
@ Michael Cooper & ALL
Have a safe New Year
LikeLike
@Trojan Pam
Could we not go so far as to say Antisocial personality disorder? Although I agree it really comes down to a defective personality. I can almost bet that lady saw herself as the victim of those black youth. In her mind they were probably taunting her to act. She had to put them in there place
You even see this behavior with “well meaning” whites. Not on that large of a scale but it is there.
LikeLike
Do you see this as a trait of all whites, some, or the majority ?
LikeLike
@resw77
OK, make it REAL simple for you.
1. Rosina made at least 2 statements about the problem of gun availability in the USA. She appealed mainly to anecdotal evidence (eg, experience in other countries) and deeply held personal beliefs (guns are responsible for violence) as well as moral grounds (owning guns is wrong).
2. You countered with straw man arguments in an attempt to discredit her and to make the case that her assertions were unfounded.
My point: In no way did any of your arguments discredit her statements or make the case the assertions were unfounded.
In fact, some of your argument supported her assertion rather than discredit it.
I am not saying that her reasoning is sufficient to support her assertions, but your counter argument did nothing to discredit them or make them unfounded either.
I hope Abagond does a post on straw man arguments soon.
That is one of the problems in the guns rights debate in the USA, ie, appeal to anecdotal evidence, moral convictions, values and beliefs and fallacious (eg, straw man arguments, base rate fallacies, etc.). The solution to this is not purely one of right and wrong, but one of politics.
Your reasoning process reflects more one of political attitudes rather than any logical reasoning. You obviously cherish gun rights (over other values that others in the society feel are important).
Not sure how to get the most objective view unless we look at analysis prepared by bodies such as The United Nations Human Rights Committee which still states that gun violence is a problem in the USA.
(https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/12/22/21-ways-the-us-violates-human-rights/)
Only thing we can be sure of – if guns were banned in the USA and police did not carry guns, we certainly would have less gun violence (whether accidental or intentional). It would also pretty much end the problem of phantom weapons used as any kind of defense against gun or other violence.
There may be a temporary increase in gun violence immediately after a ban (which the experience in the UK and Australia tend to suggest) as the number of guns circulating in the society decrease and become increasingly concentrated in the hands of those who use guns for violent purposes. However, as time goes on, gun circulation also is reduced in those segments of the population as well and overall gun violence drops to a much lower level.
It is undetermined if we will face an huge increase in other forms of violence to fill the vacuum, or if other civil rights would be seriously eroded. Anecdotal evidence from other countries tend to suggest not. However, given the culture and history of the USA, it is not entirely possible to be sure what would happen.
The UN seems not to have declared the right to own and operate a gun to be a civil right. Otherwise, they would have castigated those countries which have banned private gun ownership.
If you still are confused what my point is, then please read this.
(https://abagond.wordpress.com/2014/12/26/wilfully-obtuse/)
LikeLike
Sorry, I mean
“The UN seems not to have declared the right to own and operate a gun to be a universal civil right. “
LikeLike
@ Trojan Pam
I noticed this happened when there weren’t any black adults around. Otherwise, I bet this woman would have kept it moving and called the police instead, as opposed to letting her inner Zimmerman shine. But that’s another thing about the sociopaths and psychopaths among us – they choose their targets carefully and only those who are less likely to pose a threat to them or possess a significant capacity to harm them.
As for the big picture, look at it from a tribalistic standpoint – what you’re seeing is a dominant tribe doing everything in its power to subjugate a minority tribe to keep that tribe from ever becoming strong enough to completely dominate and quite possibly destroy said dominant tribe. But these attempts are not just corrosive on the national and social fabric, but also on the mind. These people are destroying themselves mentally just to maintain their dominant positioning.
LikeLike
“Only thing we can be sure of – if guns were banned in the USA and police did not carry guns, we certainly would have less gun violence (whether accidental or intentional).”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
This is not true according to the way many appraise GUN VIOLENCE. Historically governments in their insatiable appetite for more and more power/control would use whatever means necessary (GUNS) to subjugate its citizenry.
Even the THREAT of using violence IS violence. Then there’s the actual/real violence.
Recall Tiananmen Square! And the KENT STATE shootings!
Guns only in the hands of the military/police is a recipe for disaster!
Without firearms how then can the people defend themselves from a wayward corrupt government?
By voting? LOL
Or perhaps they can become more compliant to the edicts of a STATE turned bad?
Criminals (both in government and outside of government) will always find ways to possess weapons, illegal or otherwise.
LikeLike
@ Peter Cooper
That article you linked concerning the masked robber is a new low. I know it’s probably happened before. This monster also claimed to be a Seminole Native American on top of that.
LikeLike
“Some Blacks (certainly NOT all) do rob people’s homes, stores, markets, and banks but so do some Whites. ”
I never said whites didn’t break the law. My original comment was “If whites have ‘psychopathic racial personality’ then why is most violent interracial crime committed by blacks?” You responded with a false claim that white’s were more likely to be mass shooters. Now you pick random crimes to make some point about white families. Should I pick random crimes committed by black families?
LikeLike
@Just me
Even taking this into account PLUS all the terror/massacres/killings inflicted on minority ethnicities like Uighurs and Tibetans as well as all the skirmishes in disputed territories (South China Sea, East China Sea, Kashmir), and the trepidation re: the PLA coming out on the streets of HK during the Occupy protests, China still has a very small fraction of gun violence and threat of gun violence that the USA has despite having 4 1/2 times as many people. There is no comparison.
Can you give any real world example where private citizens are more or less banned from carrying guns, but which suffers (or enjoys) a higher level of gun violence?
The vast majority of police in HK, Taiwan, and Japan do not normally carry guns. Political pressure forces most of them to remain unarmed and not to use lethal weapons on ordinary citizenry. Would that make you feel better?
In the USA, since citizens do carry guns, has that been effective in squashing violent aggression from the National Guard or militarized police? If anything, it gives public security forces more license to deploy deadly force.
But China certainly has had more abortions than the USA for the past few decades. What “weapon” would be effective in fighting that?
LikeLike
@Big Momma
Because it is indeed a personality disorder conducted on a global scale. Think about the social practices in South Africa, Australia, and even New Zealand and every place in the world whites chose to colonize. You think being 13% of the world population yet demanding to be Dietes over everyone else is a good proposition that would sit well?
LikeLike
@sharina
@resw77
@Trojan Pam
@thwack
I converted The Isis papers to computer years ago and thus have a copy of it
(side note – I find increasingly any and all books of interest can be found online
or converted ,except the most obscure like Neely fullers work,which I’m not impressed enough with to even buy and return)
and after a simple search of the book ,YES she repeatedly uses the term defective;genetically defective albino mutants and various combinations thereof.
One thing I’ve realized in my studies esp in the subject of science, is a trained professional can form a hypothesis and put it forth for public consideration but no one can have a “THEORY” this is ot the way science works ,any and every hypothesis must be repeatedly
INDEPENDENTLY verified before it can be call a theory ,verified or falsified by another scientist ,actually several other scientist;
this is one of many reasons why Dr.welsings work while interesting in its insights ,has many flaws and is in not scientific, btw the same holds true for the work of the late Dr Bobby E. Wright.
LikeLike
@thwack
I didn’t even know she (dr.welsing) even had a sister ,you seem very informed ,where do you get your info?
I also greatly appreciate your forthright questions and statements,do to technical issues I may not be able to respond in as timely a fashion as I would like but ,rest assured I will respond.
LikeLike
I couple of links that might be of interest
Mandisa Thomas How Religion Crippled the Black Community
(https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EQ8_IV310qI)
Why You Can’t Reconcile God and Evolution
http://www.alternet.org/belief/why-you-cant-reconcile-god-and-evolution?paging=off¤t_page=1#bookmark
LikeLike
“Can you give any real world example where private citizens are more or less banned from carrying guns, but which suffers (or enjoys) a higher level of gun violence?”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
jefe…
You are kidding, right? You really need me to point out to YOU modern massacres and genocides where governments used their military (GUNS) to eradicate bothersome UNARMED citizens? Are you serious??? Or, are you just playing dumb in trying to win a debate/point about why ordinary everyday people should NOT own guns?
I’ve never heard anyone describing gun or any other sort of deadly violence as something enjoyable. But to answer your question, off the top of my head Nazi Germany comes to mind. The original Native People (some Indians) in North America in certain so called US territories also comes to mind.
The gun control movement born in the US largely came about in an effort to keep firearms out of the hands of large concentrations of Black people. If Black people really possessed the amount of guns that the police swear/think that they do, there would probably be LESS killing of Black people by the police – and George Zimmerman types.
It’s way easier and less threatening to one’s self to shoot/kill people that aren’t shooting back at you. AND it’s common (for a white cop) to say to a judge, “It looked like he/she had a gun …I was really in fear for my life, your honor!” And that will excuse the murder/manslaughter.
Also comes to mind:
Stalin in Russia. Pol Pot in Cambodia/Vietnam. And just about everywhere else where the people are unarmed governments eventually send in troops with orders to kill to force their total compliance. Recent history is rife with MANY global examples. If YOU are truly interested, the Internet is YOUR friend.
LikeLike
@ TeddyBearSniffer
Bringing up White people’s PRP between the 16th and 19th centuries would only be overlooked by people, like Big Momma. In fact, to most Whites, like Big Momma, colonization, human dehumanization and genocide, are ancient atrocities and are used as SHIFT BLAMING by Blacks. To prove my point, Big Momma said in one of her previous comments:
“I’m sure you’d love to use crimes committed by those [Whites with PHP] long dead to justify violent interracial crime today.”
What’s so hilarious is that present-day Whites love to use Whites, like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson who are LONG DEAD, to validate who they are as a people.
Oh, by the way, both Washington and Jefferson committed crimes too.
LikeLike
Mbeti
this is one of many reasons why Dr.welsings work while interesting in its insights ,has many flaws and is in not scientific, btw the same holds true for the work of the late Dr Bobby E. Wright.
I didn’t even know she (dr.welsing) even had a sister ,you seem very informed ,where do you get your info?
————————————————————————————————–
This is why I keep referring to The Cress Theory of Color Confrontation; which is a separate publication from The Issis Papers. I can’t find my copy right now but it is THE stand alone publication of the actual theory and as such is the one I suggest reading first before going on to The Issis Papers which is a collection of various papers she wrote that serve as the data for The Cress Theory of Color Confrontation.
After Dr. Welsing was denied tenure at Howard University (I suspect by other black administrators doing the bidding of their white/Jewish masters) she started a monthly lecture series “The Cress Welsing Institute for Psychiatric and Social Research” the 2nd thursday every month; September thru June, 7pm to 10pm. Afterwards we would sometimes carry on the discussion outside till 3am.
Over the years efforts were made to shut her down by claiming she needed “special insurance” to meet on university grounds; we had to meet outside on a few occasions due to these kinds of last minute cock-blocking attempts. When this happened I noted all the laughing and giggling going on in the different rooms and was reminded of Welsing’s observation that serious black people make EVERYBODY nervous.
(thats why we are always laughing)
Indeed, The Cress Theory of Color Confrontation is only a theory, but so is Darwinian Evolution, and they teach that in school?
Like all great theories, the Cress theory’s beauty is in its simplicity, predictive quality and ability to function as an explicator of both mechanism and agency.
If thats not a good enough theory, give me a better one?
Oh, thats right, no one else has written one.
LikeLike
To prove my point, Big Momma said in one of her previous comments:
“I’m sure you’d love to use crimes committed by those long dead to justify violent interracial crime today. That’s the kind of thing someone with a ‘psychopathic racial personality’ would do.”
^^^
And I was right, too.
LikeLike
Notice that Whites, particularly White men who are affected by Fragile White Male Ego Syndrome (FWMES), biggest accusation is Black men who are accused of raping White women. About a year ago I came across a White man’s blog. Yes, it was by accident. His blog had numerous pictures and captions of Black men who “raped” White women. I used quotation marks before and after the word rape because the racist blogger labeled OJ Simpson and other Black men who dated or married White women as “black rapists”. For the sake of argument, let’s just assume that these Black men who dated or married White women were rapists. Would the rape of White women nullify what White men have done to native women across the globe? Many Whites believe it would. For me, it does NOT. (Keep in mind, I’m making a point NOT justifying an inhumane act (rape).)
Does the history of the Black rapist comes close to the history of the White rapist? Why do Black men rape White women? Why do White men rape Black women? There are accounts that White men justified raping Black women because “they were seductive”.
On the slave plantation the involuntary and voluntary rape of Black women were norms. One of the most famous voluntary rape stories in slavery is the “slave-master/slave-girl” relationship of Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings.
http://ih.constantcontact.com/fs173/1113609693810/img/2436.png?a=1116043691049
The involuntary rape of Black women is often ignored.
(Above) An African slave woman being branded by a White slave-trader. Black slave women were regularly raped by the White slave-trader, slave-master, plantation overseerer and plantation “contractor” (Brad Pitt’s role in ’12 Years a Slave’).
To sum up my comment, the history of the Black rapist does NOT come close to the history of the White rapist. Unlike the Black racist, the historical White racist has produced new racial groups in the “New World”, like Meszitos and Mulattoes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mestizo
(Above) A so-called Meszito family
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mulatto
(Above) A so-called Mulatto family
LikeLike
@ Big Momma
“And I was right, too.” LMAO!!
Two of the psychological disorders of PRP that weren’t listed:
1. Having the last words (that’s White people for you)
2. Always right (“White is right!”)
LikeLike
@Mbeti and Abagond
Thank you both for providing clarification on the quote in question.
LikeLike
@Michael Cooper
“Two of the psychological disorders of PRP that weren’t listed:
1. Having the last words (that’s White people for you)
2. Always right (“White is right!”)”——I could not agree more.
LikeLike
@Just Me…
Simply trying to understand your argument. Some of it is not clear. Bear with me while I am trying to understand your position.
So are you saying that gun control advocates would like to make it easier to kill blacks? That their goal is mainly to keep firearms out of the hands of blacks (and not necessarily others)? Don’t gun rights advocates also push the idea that they want to protect themselves from violent evil people (ie, blacks), so that they can shoot and kill them?
So the ultimate goal for gun rights advocates is to put guns in the hands of whites (and not others), and gun control advocates to take it out of blacks, so that both sides are able to shoot and kill black people with (more or less) impunity. Well, perhaps.
I agree that stuff like background checks might disproportionately favour whites, and disfavour blacks depending on how it is designed, not too unlike voting eligibility requirements in the 20th century. If such a system is developed, it would require strict oversight. Any kind of gun rights relaxation or gun control could be designed to disfavour blacks.
100% agree.
But that is because gun possession is common, not because it is banned. In areas where private gun ownership is banned, “It looked like he/she had a gun …I was really in fear for my life, your honor!” cannot be used as a standard defense.
OK, selective gun control targeting blacks is certainly NOT advisable. That leads to the abuse that you just mentioned.
It seems that you are suggesting that if the citizenry had been adequately armed, those genocides could have been largely prevented. And that places like the USA avoid these kinds of mass genocides (at least nowadays) because they allow citizenry to be personally armed.
Yes, that was some of the thinking behind the 2nd amendment, ie, arming the citizens would prevent forced violent abuses from the State. However, that is not how it is normally exercised.
So, are you saying that it is precisely because we maintain an arms race, even domestically, that we are able to maintain a level of peace and keep violent bloodshed to a minimum? Or maybe that is what is keeping the USA safe?
Would an armed citizenry have been able to prevent the democides caused during events like the Great Leap Forward? Would an armed citizenry be able to prevent the violence and bloodshed from an atomic bomb? or even smaller size events such as drone attacks?
Indeed, there are many who believe that peace is kept (or violence and bloodshed is reduced) by maintaining the arms race. That is probably the line where the debate hits its barrier. It is not easily settled unless we raise the question to a higher level, “What is Peace?”
By the time we equip all citizens with phasers and forcefield shields, we will be so much safer, it seems. If that is the case, the key to international and domestic peace and stability is to throw all of our efforts into developing sophisticated, effective but cheap weapons.
LikeLike
“It seems that you are suggesting that if the citizenry had been adequately armed, those genocides could have been largely prevented.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I’m saying could – or might – have been prevented. Or perhaps lessened!
Should you ever meet any who died (unarmed) at the hands of an armed killer, you can ask them directly whether they would have preferred being armed too.
Hitler’s Nazi SS troops would have been more wary and less likely to conduct raids and searches in the Warsaw ghetto – to terrorize/kill Jews – if they knew that the oppressed people there had adequate defensive weapons, and could very well wind up paying the ultimate price.
You tell me jefe (and then I’m finished with you on this matter).
Are you suggesting that an unarmed citizenry would secure a more HUMANE or merciful treatment from a government that would send ARMED enforcers to kill them?
Would the US military have attacked Iraq and Saddam Hussein if Iraq had the capability to wage a symmetrical war against the U.S.?
Do school bullies pick on kids with their same size and temperament? Or do they go after those kids they deem smaller, weaker and less capable of mounting a defense/offense?
Who is a rapist most likely to attempt to rape? A woman he suspects might have a firearm in her possession, and willing/able to use it or the woman he believes is less threatening & unarmed?
.
LikeLike
@jefe
To make it real simple for you:
1. Based on your comments, you obviously don’t understand what the concept of a straw man argument is.
2. I made no straw man arguments in response to Rosina.
3. Rosina made several unsubstantiated statements, which evidence I laid on proves to be incorrect.
@Big Momma
“My original comment was “If whites have ‘psychopathic racial personality’ then why is most violent interracial crime committed by blacks?””
Interracial crime has less to do with racism than hate crime. We know that blacks constitute most victims of racial hate crime in America. We also know that most interracial crime in America is not classified as racial hate crime.
LikeLike
@Mbeti
“and after a simple search of the book ,YES she repeatedly uses the term defective;genetically defective albino mutants and various combinations thereof.”
Thanks. That’s what Abagond confirmed.
“this is one of many reasons why Dr.welsings work while interesting in its insights ,has many flaws and is in not scientific”
First, there’s nothing unscientific about formulating a hypothesis. Second, even though I find calling albinos “defective” disparaging, here’s what NIH says
“Albinism occurs when one of several genetic DEFECTS makes the body unable to produce or distribute melanin”
Therefore, the hypothetical question Welsing poses is whether what we call white or pale people who are not albinos have some form of “albinism.” So I ask you, if albinism, according to the NIH means “Genetic abnormalities of the melanin pigment system in which the synthesis of melanin is reduced or absent are called albinism,” WHY is Welsing wrong to think so-called white people have a form of albinism? And if NIH calls albinism a “defect” why should Welsing be castigated for doing the same.
LikeLike
And if NIH calls albinism a “defect” why should Welsing be castigated for doing the same?
————————————————————————————————
*thwack butts in*
1st
Because white people and albinos are two different things. White people produce melanin and “white” is a political category. The last white person to try and give it a scientific definition got bombed into the stone age by other white people.
2nd
White people have done pretty well with the amount of melanin they produce. Calling this “defective” is to engage in subjective value judgement which is NOT scientific. I have this same argument with white people all the time; natural selection does not care “what you like or dislike”; it is a measure of fitness for the environment.
PS– several years ago I asked albinos on the NOAH website (National Organization for Albinism and Hypo-pigmentation) if albinism was a disability.
Some said it was, some said it wasn’t. Upon further investigation I discovered their answers were dependent whether they were receiving disability payments for their albinism; and whether you were receiving disability payments for your albinism was dependent on whether you were a white person.
When I pointed out that black people with albinism were not getting the help they needed to qualify for disability payments by the white people with albinism; the white person (that did NOT have albinism) who moderates the board banned me for “disrupting the discussion board.
But not before the black people with albinism understood that white people had a mechanism (language) for getting disability for their albinism but were not sharing it with the black people with albinism.
I also asked the black albinos why the site had a separate section called “people of color with albinism”.
Their answer was very interesting.
LikeLike
“And if NIH calls albinism a “defect” why should Welsing be castigated for doing the same.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Because white-supremacy (the nearly invisible Mass Mind) dictates that the good Dr. Welsing is a heretic and that her theories are fallacious & unscientific.
Or said another way:
The Matrix is STILL UP and going strong with its almost all powerful conditioning of deceptions, illusions and mass confusion. Seems like there’s abundantly more blue pill swallowers than those who have taken the red one.
LikeLike
Giving Dr. Frances Cress Welsing an hour’s worth of my time really took the whole tribalism theory I had and turned it on its head. In essence, the entire edifice upon which white supremacy in socioeconomic and institutional terms stands stems from the deep seated knowledge that their very genetic makeup makes them a prime target for a slow yet certain target of natural selection.
Combine that with the deep-seated belief that black Americans would return the favor for slavery and Jim Crow and you get a particularly paranoid and hyper-vigilant people who, whether silently or vocally, advocate tactics to sandbag and short-circuit non-white communities just to maintain their own socioeconomic positioning, as well as their genetic survival. Now that’s something I find very interesting.
I think the gun debate is a mere sideshow compared to this nation’s actual problems, which include how state-sponsored terrorism as practiced through the justice system combined with media propaganda continues to keep the black community in a state of fear and confusion.
LikeLike
Judging by some of the informed and not so informed comments about her work on the origins of white supremacy (racism) I look forward to your long overdue post on Dr Cress Frances Wesling…Abagond! ☺
LikeLike
@thwack
“Because white people and albinos are two different things”
I didn’t actually call white people “albinos.” Neither did Welsing, AFAICT. Having a “form of albinism,” is a big distinction.
“White people have done pretty well with the amount of melanin they produce. ”
I don’t know what you mean by that. Albinism is a function of internal melanin production. It has nothing to how well someone kills, steals or violently dominates, unless you have some evidence to suggest that melanin production affects human intelligence or human behaviour.
“Their answer was very interesting.”
Care to share?
LikeLike
resw77
@thwack
“Their answer was very interesting.”
Care to share?
—————————————————————————————————–
Sure; but for purposes of clarity you need to understand the 4 classes of people participating on the NOAH website discussion board circa 04, 06…
1. White people without albinism
2. White people WITH albinism
3. Nonwhite people without albinism
4. Nonwhite people WITH albinism
Everybody on the discussion board was a member of one of those classes. The discussion board was divided into 6 to 8 or so categories for discussion; “children”, “eye care/vision”, “events/meet ups”… but one of the categories was “People of Color With Albinism”
This category set off my “racism detector” because past experience had taught me when ever nonwhite people have a sub organization inside of a larger organization, its ALWAYS due to the PRACTICE of racism white supremacy within the larger organization.
I soon found the evidence when I asked questions about racism. I made sure to ask those who responded which of the 4 classes of people they belonged to and quickly noticed it was the white people WITHOUT albinism who were responding with; non answers, cockblocks, personal attacks, evasion… but I kept pushing for answers from people WITH albinism.
(Do you see how the white people WITHOUT albinism are functioning as the white supremacists? From here on I will refer to them as “WWAs”)
The WWAs wanted to ban me but because I was polite, courteous and attempting to solve a problem they all knew existed, they knew it would instead make them look like racists. So instead of banning me, they declared all discussions of race are hereby confined to the “People of Color with Albinism” thread. See what they did?
The WWAs thought they could end the discussion of race by objecting to it and confining it to “the ghetto.”
At first it worked. I was there in the “People of Color with Albinism” thread, basically talking to myself. The nonwhite people both with and without albinism were afraid to talk to me because they knew the WWAs were monitoring it; they were afraid of “getting in trouble” with the white supremacists.
I solved this problem by flipping the discussion from the usual stuff black people talk about ( “woe is me, woe is me”, “nobody know the troubles Ive seen…” , “old man river, he just keeps movin…”
to addressing specific problems People of Color with Albinism had, and suggesting specific solutions. ALL the nonwhite people came BACK to the POCWA thread and began to interact constructively. Guess what? MOST of their problems were no different than the ones ALL nonwhite people have in a system of racism white supremacy. This is when they reveal the origin of the “People Of Color With Albinism” thread. The WWAs produced it as a tool to confine discussions of the problems POCWA faced due to white supremacy to a single thread. Don’t forget, this was done by the white people WITHOUT albinism. Do you now “see” how a blind man can identify the pieces on a chess board by the way they move and function? I could tell which one of the 4 categories a person was in by how they FUNCTIONED on that discussion board.
But I digress…
Continuing; As I began to make counter racism suggestions, the white people WITHOUT albinism (WWAs) began to “invade” the POCWA thread to cockblock, divert, distract the discussion. See how that works? White supremacy is NOT a place, its a PERSON. The white people who practice racism are the smartest, most efficient, most economical, most PRE-EMPTIVE people on the planet. They saw nonwhite people engaging in constructive problem solving WITHOUT THEM, and they swarmed the room to disrupt it.
But even they were no match for code. They could discredit me personally but a concept is immaterial; it exists independent of any persons credit or discredit. I deployed one in the form of the question “is albinism a disability?” (that took the focus off me and put it back on albinism which is supposed to be the entire purpose of the board)
The disagreement in the answer was basically split among racial lines with white people (with and without albinism) saying it was a disability and nonwhite people (with and without albinism) saying no or being unsure. I formed a hypothesis that:
1. Affirmative answers were based on receiving disability payments
2. Disability payments were based on a mechanism for receiving them.
3. The mechanism was LANGUAGE.
4. White people (with and without albinism) had the language.
5. Nonwhite people (with and without albinism) did not.
At this point, the white people WITHOUT albinism banned me because the nonwhite people with and without albinism began to ask all the white people questions that only I was asking.
They may have redesigned the discussion board, but I saved some of the pages for future reference just incase.
LikeLike
@resw77
but she didn’t call it a hypothesis ,she called it her theory,if she had specifically said
this is my hypothesis and I await independent confirmation or refutation of said hypothesis ,that would have been scientific ,as it stands she misapplied the term and procedure and that leads to pseudoscience.
In regards to the issue of dr.welsing calling albinism a defect and your citing of the NIH’s definition ,I agree
Indeed among her numerous observations and insights I think this was one of the most useful and informative
she deconstructed and demystified “whiteness”
No white people are not albino’s but they have a form of albinism ,most are partial albino’s in that most lack significantly the ability to produce melanin in their skin which is what “whiteness” is phenotypically.
but
interestingly most have black or brown hair and black or brown isises
yet the almost full albino traited whites – blonde(white to yellow hair) and blue irises are promoted as the “best” white people (color-ism amongst the white community anyone?)
btw this also applies to Asians especially Koreans ,Japanese and a good portion of Chinese ,who happen to be around same latitude geographically as Europeans, they just don’t have as many full albino-albinic – meaning blonde and blue eyes, as well as being a older as opposed to more recent european
phenotypic population group.
another thing is how this phenotypic condition came about – due to black full epidermis(skin) pigmented africans migrating and settling in the northern latitude which has less direct sun exposure leading to reduced need and ability to produce melanin epidermisly
who knew this would lead to a extremely aggressive population establishing political and cultural
hegemony or a global dominance hierarchy based primarily on lies and violence.
@all
good luck waiting for abagond to do a post on Dr.welsing or her one book (which is just a collection of her essay’s on various aspects of racism dating from around 1970 to the mid 1980’s) he’s done two on bobby wright and scores on numerous other subjects but ,seems to have little real interest in doing one or her or her book,
I’ve already done a brief one on fuller and started one on welsing and the only reason a haven’t finished is I want to do a point by point chapter by by chapter analysis of her “one” book the isis papers, come to think of it if I wasn’t such a perfectionist I could easily crank out one on her in a
couple of hours, and so could any of you ,
I mean what part of free blog ,needing only an email address and the minimum ability to read and write an I suppose to miss!
LikeLike
@ Kwamla
The post on the Isis Papers will go up Monday..
LikeLike
Mbeti
No white people are not albino’s but they have a form of albinism ,most are partial albino’s in that most lack significantly the ability to produce melanin in their skin which is what “whiteness” is phenotypically.
——————————————————————————————
But those white people who lack significantly the ability to produce melanin in their skin did not need that ability in the northern hemisphere so does it qualify as a defect?
I submit melanin production could become so low as to qualify as a defect even in the northern hemisphere, and this is the case for white people with albinism; but not a white person like princess Di, or the average white person you meet on the street. Nature has great economy and would limit the production of “unnecessary structure” and use the energy for something else.
Black people in Africa are among the least hairy people on the planet, is that a defect?
If you shave a gorilla or chimpanzee, what color is its skin?
If you shave a black dog, what color is its skin?
LikeLike
It never used to be considered a defect, but these days, it seems Whites are strongly encouraged to slather on artificial sun blocking ointments and wear wide-brim hats and scarves. I’m not sure why this has become such a concern recently.
LikeLike
@King
I suspect its because white people now live long enough to die from skin cancer. Even if a small skin cancer tumor is detected and removed, one or more cells from it could have traveled elsewhere and found a home in another organ or tissue.
If skin cancer was just limited to skin, it would not be as deadly as it is.
LikeLike
I want you guys to think loud and clearly about CIRCUMSTANTIAL CONTEXT. Don’t matter where and who you are in life, if you can’t sympathize with that term there’s no discussion. Because you are beyond reasoning with.
LikeLike
At long last:
LikeLike
@resw77
Likewise 🙂
I am quite sure that I do. However, it seems that you do not. At least in this case. You think otherwise. At this point, there is no way to resolve this. Maybe when Abagond does some posts on straw man and some other logical fallacies it might be clearer. At least, others can try to help resolve.
You did this time. I spelled it out for you.
I have noticed over the past couple years that sometimes you make some very good well thought out arguments, but I have seen you use straw man arguments and other logical fallacies on other threads at times. Normally I remain silent, but I did bring it up once or twice in the past. It went nowhere.
You may think otherwise. We have no good way to resolve this, so I guess we have to drop it for now.
Indeed, her statements were unsubstantiated, as she appealed to anecdotal observations and value and moral judgments. You (despite your claim to the contrary) tried to use straw man and other erroneous arguments to refute it. In any case, unsubstantiated statements are not necessarily incorrect, and erroneous arguments do not necessarily lead to wrong conclusions.
If the issue of gun rights and gun control could be solved by scientific analysis or even logical arguments, it would have been resolved a long time ago. The reason is because data and statistics can be used to justify various viewpoints and the ultimate judgment is really dependent on moral and political arguments (which spill over into concepts such as human rights and right and wrong). There is no universal standard, so we have to reach a consensus or compromise.
The UN has criticized the USA over its inability to control gun violence, but has stopped short of instructing the USA what to do about it. However, I am not aware that it has criticized any country that implemented bans on gun ownership as an infringement on human or civil rights. We cannot claim that the UN has a monopoly on the determination of human rights, but at least we can say that it reflects to some extent a global consensus.
LikeLike
@Just me,
I have 2 observations regarding this.
1. All countries which were invaded by HItler’s armies have more restrictive gun rights than the USA. If experience is the best teacher and if the example set in the USA is the best model, then they all would have adopted a less restrictive model than the USA. They have not.
2. The USA had a similar experience during WWII, yet did not prevent, delay or lessen the oppression that the government inflicted on its people.
Nearly 120,000 Japanese Americans were rounded up, forced to dispose of all their possessions, property and businesses, and imprisoned in internment concentration camps under the surveillance of armed guards. As Americans, they were also permitted to own and possess firearms prior to their imprisonment. That did not at all stop the government from stripping them of their civil and constitutional rights and lock them into camps – only one small step from genocide. Anyone who resisted was arrested and thrown in jail. I am not sure if any of the prisoners fired a gun to resist their captors, but if any did, the troops would have certainly have been able to shoot to kill without any fear of impunity.
If gun possession by civilians could not even prevent the WWII internment camps imprisoning law abiding Americans, how can we expect it to be effective in the future?
I was born, raised and educated in the USA, taught about the value of the 2nd amendment and the cherished right that it is — with all the examples you gave and other similar ones of why it is so important. My grandfather in Alabama kept a loaded shotgun in the house and showed it to us when we were kids.
Then I have lived / worked / studied in at least 4 different countries (and traveled to dozens of others) that are very strict about gun ownership or even more or less completely ban it. Of course it is strictly an anecdotal observation, but there it is a TREMENDOUS peace of mind knowing that 99.99% of the fellow citizens do not carry or possess firearms. It is a peace of mind which disappears when I am in the USA. People overseas ask me to explain what it is about Americans and guns — I can only retort with the amendment clause in the US constitution, and that many Americans feel the very exact same way that you do. No matter how I explain it to them, they do not understand.
It seems like you think the USA was justified in that invasion. Well, I am not sure we can call it a successful war / invasion. The response has not been exactly symmetrical, but it has not been good for either side either.
IT seems that you hold the opinion that peace is maintained by matching the arms race, escalating if necessary. IT seems that the theory of evolution might support that somewhat – that violence or other disruption erupts when the equilibrium is not maintained. But that peace seems like it is kept in an incessant tenuous state. Does that lead to peace of mind even when there is a temporary moratorium on violence?
LikeLike
“It seems like you think the USA was justified in that invasion. ”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Oh really? Where did you get that from? Strawman much?
“IT seems that you hold the opinion that peace is maintained by matching the arms race, escalating if necessary.”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Did I talk about maintaining peace, an arms race, or did I talk about bullies, rapists, the SS gestapo and other armed resistance?
Fuxk peace! Peace is an elusive global concept or idea in a world full of hardened white hearts and nuclear weaponry. I’m talking about mere survival! The ability to breathe and remain alive another day.
You are over-reaching in your assigning things I never said or implied, to my argument. And the last time I looked at a history source, the Asians who were interned during WWII were never routinely shot or killed. My point is that firearms can keep some people from being KILLED, not that firearms should keep people from being arrested or interned. (That’s a point only you are making.)
But since you brought it up, I wonder if Japanese Americans (with a model minority — don’t make waves, don’t bring any unfavorable attention to one’s self, mindset) would have had the resolve to defend themselves and their families if GI troops were putting them in front of firing squads, or raping their women?
“IT seems that you …..”
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
I notice jefe that you often respond to me with, “IT seems that you ….,” an awful lot.
May I ask, do you have vision problems, or comprehension issues?
No disrespect, but I believe my writing is lucid and straightforward. Perhaps there is something in my simple and clear writing style that is befuddling you?
LikeLike
@jefe
“I am quite sure that I do. However, it seems that you do not. ”
All your opinion, and your previous comments suggest otherwise.
“I spelled it out for you.”
What you spelled out are not examples of “straw man arguments.” You have only stated that I didn’t disprove some hypothetical claims Rosina made (based on an inaccurately attributed comment I made) based on your own assumptions.
“If the issue of gun rights and gun control could be solved by scientific analysis or even logical arguments, it would have been resolved a long time ago.”
I gave no indication whatsoever to suggest I supported or credit gun rights. That’s the problem with arguing with you. You have inaccurately attributed comments I made to statements Rosina made and then drew complete assumptions based on my comments to various hypothetical statements and opinions Rosina made and even things Rosina did not say. So it’s quite laughable if not pathetic.
LikeLike
I’ve gotten into some racial discussions with White people online, and I definitely feel this to be true. It’s something psychological with them. When you try to make them see the racism that Black people experience, they will usually then turn it around and try to make it seem like you are the bigot for even bringing it up. Talking about racism to most White people is like talking to a brick wall, I’ve found. There’s no point in doing it. To White people racism is only real when it supposedly happens to them, but they don’t want to hear it when it involves Black people. I’m done with it.
LikeLike
It’s been shown that even BLACK CHILDREN are less likely to get pain meds in ER than white children in similar medical situations.The human brain has the HARDWARE for human empathy and ethics but the SOFTWARE comes from cultural socialization. White people – especially white Americans – are socialized to be SOCIOPATHIC when it comes to black people. They cannot process human pain. Whites can change this, but a majority of them don’t want to even acknowledge that racism and white supremacy exist.
Ultimately this and other basic human rights violations committed against black would be happening if we weren’t living in a sick and violent white supremacist society where whites kill, harm, harass, and terrorize black people and LEGALLY get away with it. If a white guy who just got finished killing 12 people in a movie theatre can walk out alive with no cops SHOOTING or MAIMING him, then black people should be able to survive most of THEIR encounters with the police UNSCATHED, no matter WHAT they do. Period. Black people DO NOT have be perfect to be treated as HUMAN and the kind of crazy inhumane violence and murders inflicted upon black people of ALL ages typically ONLY happens to black people because of the knucklehead, violent, racist cops. Furthermore, crime rates are at HISTORIC LOWS. So not ONLY do there need to be less police officers in black neighborhoods, there need to be less police all around the country.
White supremacy and privatization are the biggest problems facing this society, not “street crime.” I’m anti-guns, but in THIS socio-political climate, I’m getting a gun license and I advocate all other people of predominate, visible African descent who are legally eligible to obtain guns think about doing the same. People who react in any way to violent white supremacy with justified anger are REGULARLY labeled as the ones “provoking things” by white assholes with a false white superiority complex and I’m TIRED of it.
LikeLike
Furthermore, I think that “tribalism” crap is another way whites have tried to naturalize the idea of “race” by positing that A) phenotypical differences were universally used to differentiate people as opposed to language, customs, religion, class. Elements of someone’s clothing were regularly used possible markers of ethnic identity B) that ethnic differences were a AUTOMATICALLY a cause for social conflict and war. Many societies ASSIMILATED people into their ethnic group/nation if they learned the Do I think non-white people are and can be racist? Hell no. “Race” is not a “neutral” description for different groups of people. They are inherently RANKED geographical “subspecies” of mankind on a global scale. Racism = white supremacy. Ancient people NOTICED physical differences but they didn’t deem people to be BIOLOGICALLY and/or CULTURALLY inferior because of their physical differences & ancestry. Europeans created a myth of primitive, savage, and inferior “races.” “Race” was created as a POLITICAL category to someone’s citizenship status by PHENOTYPICAL appearance.
Although people in antiquity knew of geographical variation between human populations, they did not use ‘race’ as the basis of social discrimination. Only in the 16th century were phenotypical differences especially exploited by some Europeans to justify colonization. And since the 18th century, whites have manipulated and redefined “whiteness” in various ways in the interest of assigning citizenship discriminatively especially the settlement colonies in the Americas and Australia, which were considered to be expansions of Europe. Acquiring civilization by “adoption” was a concession that could be made for other presumably less evolved Europeans such as the Irish and Southern and Mediterranean Europeans.
Native Americans didn’t think of themselves as” Native Americans” when European settlers arrived, but rather as members of separate tribes or nations, divided by language, custom and religion. In contrast, tribal membership traditionally was open to ANYONE, even Europeans, as long as they accepted tribal customs and authority. The didn’t identity by “blood quantum”—The idea of “blood quantum,” i.e., the determination of Indian identity by ANCESTRY, was imposed by the white federal government.The characteristic did the ancient Greeks believe most distinguished them from “barbarians” was language, not skin color.The Greeks, like most ancient people, did not attribute much meaning to phenotypical appearance. In ancient Greece, language indicated who was not Greek and some historians believe that the FIRST people that Greeks labeled “barbarian” were the very light-skinned Scythians who lived in the Black Sea- Caucasus region. “Ethnocentrism” and “Xenophobia” may be universal concepts -not AUTOMATIC but universal – that can apply to anyone but NOT “race” or racism. I think black people can be racially prejudiced [with good reason] but not racist.
And are you ever going to do something about the disgusting racist trolls you allow on here?
LikeLike
You should take a look at this:
http://breakingbrown.com/2015/01/why-are-negroes-with-guns-being-erased-from-civil-rights-movement/
“Why Are “Negroes With Guns” Being Erased from Civil Rights Movement?”
LikeLike
@Michael Cooper I truly do hope you’re not bringing up the systematic rapes and dehumanization of black women and girls to make it ALL about black men. The anti-black misogyny black women face is NOT about you, white men, OR white women. It’s about black women and how that misogyny effects our everyday lives. In her book “Black Macho and the Myth of the Superwoman” Michele Wallace talks about how the obsession concerning black men and rape has even convinced some black men that to ALL black people the issue of rape in the black community is about them. When Susan Brownmiller was researching her book, “Against Our Will”, which dealt with rape, she went to the Harlem Schomburg collection to obtain information on BLACK WOMEN and RAPE. A CLEARLY misogynistic, self-centered, and insensitive BLACK MALE librarian INSISTED that she begin her topic by examining historic injustice to black men. I find that kind of selfish behavior from black men to be oppressive and disgusting and it alienates black women from black men.
Furthermore, there IS no “voluntary” rape. Rape is not only grabbing someone and throwing them in the bush and forcing sex on them against their will—that is violent rape. Enslaved black women had no human rights, so they did not have the right to defend themselves from being raped by ANYONE – white or black. There was a process of fear which coerced African women to either submit to their oppressors and give into the wants of their white slave masters and others or suffer a life of misery. Their choices were to be either be exposed to the lash of an overseer in the hot sun or have their entire family split up into the four winds by their white slave owners. Women who refused to be raped by white slave masters were repeatedly whipped to subdue their resistance and most instances that hellish practice was successful – when it failed, enslaved women were frequently sold off to more brutal slave masters in the South. All these things served as a warning to OTHER enslaved women not to ever resist their masters or any white men who wanted to rape them.
And in George v, State in 1859, a court held that neither the common law nor statutory enactments (unless enslaved people were mentioned) would be applied to a case where A SLAVE RAPED ANOTHER SLAVE. The court stated, “The crime of rape does not exist in this State between African Slaves.“
In “Redefining Rape” Estelle Freedman says that we know about black men’s assault of black women because black women and girls reported them in the decades after emancipation.The first government agency to keep records on abuses to black women by their black male spouses may have been the Freedman’s Bureau. The Bureau had hundreds of complaints by black women of beatings, infidelity and lack of child support. They reported assaults to the Freedman’s Bureau, accused BOTH white and black men of rape, turned to the state to prosecute these men, and defended their OWN MORALITY in court. I repeat: The anti-black misogyny black women face is NOT about you, white men, OR white women. It’s about black women and how that misogyny effects our everyday lives.
LikeLike
After viewing that racist video on the news about those white fraternity jerks at the University of Oklahoma, i have to consider this thread post as having some merit. I didn’t want to post anything at the beginning because i wasn’t sure what to make of it. But after seeing that video today, i am convinced this thread post has some merit.
LikeLike
I was reading this on my long commute home from work and i must say this thread post gives me pause. I don’t think all whites are racist but a great number of them do exhibit this behavior that Dr. Wright wrote about. I believe that there is some truth to this. The racist troll commenters who get angry at the author of the blog reading while white are the ones Dr. Wright describes perfectly to a tee.
LikeLike
Just admit you want all whites to be nothing important or dead.
LikeLike
I mean Abagond.
LikeLike
Or atleast most poc and allies.
LikeLike
@ Uriel
I do not want them dead. I was taught to love them, to pick the White doll. I want them to live up to their ideals or at least TRY to, like the abolitionists did.
LikeLike
@ Uriel
This blog is not meant for White people. In the case of most White Americans, their egos are far too fragile and I do not have the right words to make them see what I see, even though according to linguists we speak the same language.
LikeLike
Okay, i’ll admit i went too far by saying you’d want me dead if i become too notable.
I am just angry at Origin comments gaining traction again. At least you don’t blame me/ will forgive my history/ don’t see my culture and existence as inherently evil.
LikeLike
@Uriel
Do you fit in the white bracket? Are you white?
LikeLike
@villagewriter
Yes. The closest am i am to POC-ness is that my dad is Jewish (but light-skinned, round-eyed Ashkenazi).
LikeLike