Black Lives Matter is an honorable movement and is in no way racist

Pay attention.

 

Still disingenuine as hell, huh? Black Lives Matter IS a quasi-racist movement because it seems to only care about black lives and not white, yellow, brown or blue lives. In fact, some of them have been found promoting the targeting of blue lives.

Since their "movement" was born of a pack of lies that still seem to be believed and promoted by their core, one has to be skeptical. Black lives matter only in as much as all lives matter. Had they chosen a real victim like James Byrd rather than a punk, criminal like Michael Brown, they might have less pushback.

You have to ask why they are more sympathetic about Michael Brown than they are about James Byrd or any of the other truly innocent victims out there. Things that make you go "hmmmmm..."

 

All that bull**** you posted about how whites are this, blacks are that, and asians are the other thing. Then claimed it was culture based and not race based. What is white culture? What is black culture? What is Asian culture? I'm no sociologist but I'm pretty sure most all Americans are immigrants of some sort and the Irish have different culture from the Italians and the Taiwanese have different culture from the Philippinos. Somehow however you have managed through your own probably Asian racist lens, given your proposing Asians have some superior culture apparently, to lump all of these groups into a particular culture based on race.

 

I think you are talking about a gap between white and black, but he is referring to the yawning gap which has opened in the last few decades in black families where they used to be nearly on par with white families just a few decades ago.

 

Yes, had they chosen James Byrd conservatives like you would still consider them quasi-racist. Your own words Giddy. Don't believe your lying eyes I guess.

 

"Quasi" refers to two things: 1) a bad poster child and 2) the focus on one race.

Amazing how many more black people pick up the ALL LIVES MATTER banner but you are defending those idiots and continuing with your race-baiting.

 

Where you went wrong is when you pointed out potential problems without blaming them on others. It's a well known fact that you are being racist if you are critical of any subculture without placing blame on a separate group deemed acceptable to blame for the shortcomings of the world.

 

Heh, I don't know if I'd call them assassinations, but the numbers are the numbers. You can't just go around saying BLM is causing more violence against cops when it's not.

Yes, by Bill'O's logic though he's the cause of George Tiller's murder.

Only between Native's and Blacks. Between Hispanics it's quite a bit more.

See, I actually told this to you BMD. I said marriage rates were fine before the war on drugs. When the war on drugs began, the black marriage rates just DROPPED. That's why you can cite those numbers in the 50s.

Also, since you are implying that marriage rates means success then you should ask why there was no benefit from it then.

Because see, you are saying that it's a culture thing, it's a black thing. Yet when marriage rates were high within the black population they were not high earners. They were still financially in the same position as now, despite the marriage rates being low. Well not just low but exemplary. There was no benefit of the black two parent household then.

So you should ask yourself why that is. I mean the answer is obvious to most why black people weren't able to get ahead in the 50s but I want you to come to that conclusion yourself.

 

Yes, by quoting you I'm race baiting. Brilliant.

 

See? That's how you blame negative things on others like a champ.

 

Bobby, then how do you explain the sharp drop? Let's hear your theories on it.

 

There was not much of a gap in the 50's.

In 1950, the percent of single parent families for ALL races was 7.1%. Among Blacks, it was 17%. So 83% of Black families had two parents, compared to 93% of all families.

Also:

In 1950, the percentages of white and African American women (aged fifteen and over) who were currently married were roughly the same, 67 percent and 64 percent, respectively. By 1998, the percentage of currently married white women had dropped by 13 percent to 58 percent. But the drop among African American women was 44 percent to 36 percent—more than three times larger.4 The declines for males were parallel, 12 percent for white men, 36 percent for African American men.




There was always a *small* gap from the '50's and earlier. But in recent times, the gap has grown to an enormous level.

 

You are not quoting. You leave out the qualifier "quasi" and you completely checked your reason at the door in failing to acknowledge that the qualifier "black" makes something de facto exclusive. Not brilliant on your part....

 

OMG, are you serious?

 

There was a change in culture about that time, and it was a change for the negative. Black racist groups started popping up, old values were tossed out the window and replaced with new values....there were negative consequences for this. The black community wasn't the only community this happened to during the 60's, but they seem to have been the hardest hit.

Blaming the change on "the war on drugs" suggests that almost the entire black community is comprised of addicts.....is that really what you think?

 

You have again not posted a source for your data and have once again failed to explain why the gap has always existed.

 

You know damn well what culture is.

99% of Black comedians tell jokes about the differences between Black and White culture.

Stop pretending we're all the same and there are no differences between us and we're all Americans. We're all Americans, but there are certainly differences in culture between different groups.

And yes, Irish and Germans and the Dutch all have different cultures... but for most White Americans that culture is lost. There are a ton of White Americans who have German ancestry, for example... but they are absolutely nothing like Germans.

By the way.. I'm White... not Asian. I have nothing against any group of people. The fact that you seem to think I was Asian because it seems I was speaking better of them than Whites should prove to you that I'm not racist, and I simply seek truth, whatever that truth is.

 

https://nces.ed.gov/pubs98/yi/yi11.pdf

http://www.hoover.org/sites/default/files/uploads/documents/0817998721_95.pdf



And I said I don't know the reason for the gap. Considering it was only a 10% difference in 1950, you could probably chalk that up to poverty. And in a broader picture, you could even chalk that poverty up to racism.

 

A change on culture? Really, what changed in the culture? What exactly? Since you are the expert on it so you are going to have to tell me about these black 'racist' groups in the 60s that changed.

Lol, of course not. But maybe if the war on drugs was held at college campuses the numbers for white people would have dropped as well. You are going to have to start explaining why black are arrested more for drug charges even though whites commit them just the same.