Technically, they were given equal opportunity. I know there was a poll tax and the Grandfather clause. They were still given the right and if they wanted to, they could have tried to make money (since they were free and now could have jobs) and pay the tax. I'm sorry most of them did not have enough money to pay for it. Not everyone in the country was racist and not everyone was still denying them jobs and rights. Poor white immigrant would also not have the same opportunity if they came after the 15th amendment was passed, so blacks were not the only ones affected by this (although they were affected overwhelming more). I will go ahead and say I was wrong on that though. They did not have equal opportunity but they had the right, although members of other races could fall in this same category. Better?
I really am sorry about that one. I didn't realize what you were referencing. I went back and read all my posts on this thread and couldn't find it. So, sorry again.
......still don't. No there should be no crimes for harboring or even revealing one's ignorance. Even if it is ignorance and/or hate as racism reflects. However you act to hurt someone, or discriminate in job/school whatever based on race, then you are a criminal. To me, yes I think hate crime bills are fine. I think Puedlfor put it most eloquently, the legal system already has built in flexibility. Not all acts are the same, murdering a rapist of your child/wife or your husband fighting the last days of his life from cancer IS different than killing someone for their wallet. To me hurting someone out of hate for a group is damaging both on a personal and societal level worth additional penalties. I left out murdering from this because personally I think all vicious murderers should be locked up for life.
This is so beyond comical. Technically you have the right to vote but then again technically you no longer live in this city! U.S. Supreme Court GOMILLION v. LIGHTFOOT, 364 U.S. 339 (1960) 364 U.S. 339 GOMILLION ET AL. v. LIGHTFOOT, MAYOR OF TUSKEGEE, ET AL. CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT. No. 32. Argued October 18-19, 1960. Decided November 14, 1960. Negro citizens sued in a Federal District Court in Alabama for a declaratory judgment that an Act of the State Legislature changing the boundaries of the City of Tuskegee is unconstitutional and for an injunction against its enforcement. They alleged that the Act alters the shape of Tuskegee from a square to an irregular 28-sided figure; that it would eliminate from the City all but four or five of its 400 Negro voters without eliminating any white voter; and that its effect was to deprive Negroes of their right to vote in Tuskegee elections on account of their race. The District Court dismissed the complaint, on the ground that it had no authority to declare the Act invalid or to change any boundaries of municipal corporations fixed by the State Legislature. Held: It erred in doing so, since the allegations, if proven, would establish that the inevitable effect of the Act would be to deprive Negroes of their right to vote on account of their race, contrary to the Fifteenth Amendment.
Hey, Timing wake up. I said I was wrong about the "opportunity" thing. I'm still waiting for you to prove my opinions on THIS THREAD wrong.
Why am I confined to this thread of ignorant opinions when there are a few others out already? The character weren't white because airport security workers are generally depicted as uneducated black people. That's the truth. And I don't have any statistics on the number of uneducated black people working airport security. I did suggest, as did several other people, that it should be looked into. You said these things in consecutive posts. Beautiful! Airport workers are generally depicted as uneducated black people, that's the truth, but you don't have any statistics to back up that truth. Claim a generalization as your opinion, claim it as true, then admit that you have no basis whatsoever for your opinion. It's really cute how you do that. Most of the horrible things that black people endured came in the 1900's, after they were free. I know that doesn't make it any better, but it's true. Here is another great example. You can't substantiate it but it's your honest opinion so of course it's true! And yes, they still had it bad over here, but the stories of violence and death and complete mistreatment stand out more than what the norm actually was. There was not as much violence as once thought. It's true. And another what was once thought quote.... oh it's true IT'S TRUE! Uh huh... The majority of slaves were thought on the same (or slightly lower) level as women and children. Oh and who could disagree with this one. We all know the long winding history of selling women and children for slave labor not to mention the history of working women and children to death with forced hard labor. Slavery is the black mark upon America. But what they teach you in elementary school about everyone was treated like dirt is simply just not true. There are countless books out there on this subject. And of the countless books out there on this subject you named none. Imagine that!? Slaves can be treated well, really, despite the fact that they're friggin slaves.
Here are some quotes I found that interested me and that I wish more people would adopt or at least listen to... Zora Neale Hurston-"From what I can learn, it was sad," she wrote. "Certainly. But my ancestors who lived and died in it are dead. The white men who profited by their labor and lives are dead also. I have no personal memory of those times, and no responsibility for them. Neither has the grandson of the man who held my folks. . . . I have no intention of wasting my time beating on old graves. . . . I do not belong to the sobbing school of Negroes who hold that nature somehow has given them a low-down dirty deal and whose feelings are all hurt about it. . . . Slavery is the price I paid for civilization, and that is worth all that I have paid through my ancestors for it." Booker T. Washington- "Think about it: We went into slavery pagans; we came out Christians. We went into slavery pieces of property; we came out American citizens. We went into slavery with chains clanking about our wrists; we came out with the American ballot in our hands. . . . Notwithstanding the cruelty and moral wrong of slavery, we are in a stronger and more hopeful condition, materially, intellectually, morally, and religiously, than is true of an equal number of black people in any other portion of the globe." All I want to say about this yet is that when I started posting on those threads, this evidence that I have now is what I was talking about. You might not think they pertain to certain things I said in later posts, but those got out of hand, were exaggerated and twisted. All I want this evidence to say is that there are accounts of it not being as bad as it is always portrayed. I would still like to hear what you have to say about my posts on this thread now.
I said they were generally depicted as uneducated black people. I have only seen airport security workers depicted as uneducated black people. As far as the real life numbers, I don't know. You're asking me to prove what I have seen depicted. I would still like to know real life numbers, as I'm sure you would as well. But these two statements that you pointed out do not contradict each other as you seem to think they do. You said they're generally depicted that way and that's the truth but you don't have the numbers. Fact is you don't know anymore than I do so whether or not it's the truth isn't something you can assert. "During the Early 1900's, discrimination against Southern blacks became even more widespread." -the the WorldBook Encyclopedia As I said, a lot of what they endured came in the 1900's. You'll be hardpressed to convince me that discrimination is worse than slavery. Part of the reason that discrimination may have increased had to due with Northern troops being pulled out of the South not because slaves were treated so well in comparison to free black peoples. "The slave system in America was unique in human history. Sometimes slaves were treated cruelly; at other times with kindness. They were more often used as a sign of affluence, a way of displaying one's wealth and of enjoying luxury, rather than as the means for the systematic accumulation of wealth." -Rochester Institute of Tachnology Niceness may not have been the norm as I said in this quote, but it wasn't always terrible, as you have said many times. Well as you noticed this says nothing about the norm. The state of being a slave is pretty terrible in itself so the fact that some slaves may have been treated with kindness doesn't change the fact that they were slaves and thus considered property to be bought and sold. In addition, it says nothing here about exaggerated violence towards slaves. Incidentally your quote is from a section discussing Slavery As Capitalism, not something discussing norms in slave treatment. Here is another quote from the site you cited. Capitalism increased the degree of dehumanization and depersonalization implicit in the institution of slavery. While it had been normal in other forms of slavery for the slave to be legally defined as a thing, a piece of property, in America he also became a form of capital. The third characteristic which set American slavery apart was its racial basis. In America, with only a few early and insignificant exceptions, all slaves were Africans, and almost all Africans were slaves. This placed the label of inferiority on black skin and on African culture. In other societies, it had been possible for a slave who obtained his freedom to take his place in his society with relative ease. In America, however, when a slave became free, he was still obviously an African. The taint of inferiority clung to him. Not only did white America become convinced of white superiority and black inferiority, but it strove to impose these racial beliefs on the Africans themselves. Slave masters gave a great deal of attention to the education and training of the ideal slave, In general, there were five steps in molding the character of such a slave: strict discipline, a sense of his own inferiority, belief in the master's superior power, acceptance of the master's standards, and, finally, a deep sense of his own helplessness and dependence. At every point this education was built on the belief in white superiority and black inferiority. Besides teaching the slave to despise his own history and culture, the master strove to inculcate his own value system into the African's outlook. The white man's belief in the African's inferiority paralleled African self hate. "House slaves usually lived better than field slaves. They usually had better food and were sometimes given the family's cast-off clothing. Their living accommodation was also better than those of other slaves. In some cases the slaves were treated like the slave-owners children. When this happened close bonds of affection and friendship usually developed. Even though it was illegal, some house slaves were educated by the women in the family. Trusted house slaves who had provided good service over a long period of time were sometimes promised their freedom when their master's died. However, there are many cases where this promise was not kept." -Spartacus Educational (House Slaves) So, in that case, I was right. It's easier to find accounts and testiments that say otherwise, but most people don't want to publish the unpopular opinion. On a plantation what would be the ratio of house slaves to field slaves? I think it's rational to say that your example is in the distinct minority of how slaves were treated and far from the majority. So, I don't have countless books. And perhaps I was exaggerating. And perhaps some of it was just wrong. My original statement still stands. This all started really when I said slavery was not that bad. And I have evidence that not all slaves were beaten and killed. Well I've never read anything that said all slaves were beaten and killed. If all slaves had been killed we'd have very few black people alive today in our country. Your statement said that it wasn't true that everyone was treated like dirt but again being a slave is a pretty crappy situation. I think you may simply have a perception that everyone claims that all slaves were beaten and killed when that isn't the case and I doubt you'll find anything seriously claiming that. Part of the reason there are not more books or sources confirming what I have said is because most people would dismiss it saying "how can you say that when it was so bad and we have all these slave testimonies saying it was this bad?" Everyone on this board dismissed it. A question came up while I was looking for my evidence that said "Should we trust the slave testimonials?" No answers to any questions were provided as it was for essays in a class. But I think that the fact that this question was even asked (in a college course) should say something. I'm not saying that they're all wrong and I don't believe that they are. It is possible that some were exaggerated though. And if I read all the books that were required for this class, I might find the answer. Right now though, I'm worrying about my own classes, but perhaps I might go back to that website and check them out (this was not a course I was taking, but I found online). That could be part of the reason however it not being true at all could also be the reason. Here are some quotes I found that interested me and that I wish more people would adopt or at least listen to... Zora Neale Hurston-"From what I can learn, it was sad," she wrote. "Certainly. But my ancestors who lived and died in it are dead. The white men who profited by their labor and lives are dead also. I have no personal memory of those times, and no responsibility for them. Neither has the grandson of the man who held my folks. . . . I have no intention of wasting my time beating on old graves. . . . I do not belong to the sobbing school of Negroes who hold that nature somehow has given them a low-down dirty deal and whose feelings are all hurt about it. . . . Slavery is the price I paid for civilization, and that is worth all that I have paid through my ancestors for it." Booker T. Washington- "Think about it: We went into slavery pagans; we came out Christians. We went into slavery pieces of property; we came out American citizens. We went into slavery with chains clanking about our wrists; we came out with the American ballot in our hands. . . . Notwithstanding the cruelty and moral wrong of slavery, we are in a stronger and more hopeful condition, materially, intellectually, morally, and religiously, than is true of an equal number of black people in any other portion of the globe." I wouldn't touch those quotes with a ten foot pole but it honestly doesn't surprise me that you're a fan of David Horowitz's views on race. He's big on the conspiracy of blacks hating white people. Thanks for posting evidence/quotes to support your claims, it makes it much easier to have a fruitful discussion.
Overlooking the answers to this heretofore, I will just answer the question as posed...Should it be a crime to be a rascist? No...obviously not. Being a racist is a passive occupation, however moronic or more likely, ignorant. Does it lead to crime? You betcha...not as much as poverty though.SHould we make it illegal to be poor? Does it promote erroneous dogma...to an extent, but that's their right. However, racism is a belief, and as such it should be held as sacred, by the law, as any other belief. Where it should be dealt with is in schools, and social programs...The thought police are, I hope, a distant memory. A rascist criminal should be treated as a criminal, period. A non-criminal rascist should be treated like any other non-criminal before the law...
What the hell is a rascist? Oh, you meant racist . . . Well, if racism means the systematic societal oppression of people due to their race, then being a racist should be a crime. But if racism means a prejudiced worldview, then it should not be a crime. You can't legislate thoughts.
I admitted that I exaggerated things. But I did give you proof that what I said was not unfounded. About airport security, I still have seen them depicted as uneducated black people on several occasions and I have never seen them depicted as white, uneducated or not. So I can say in my experience, it is the truth. As far as dicrimination, it is relevent because discrimination leads to other things. Slaves might not have had it worse in the 1900's because they were free. Terrible things were now happening to free men in the US and were widespread. They were free but they couldn't do a damn thing about it. When they were slaves, the white people honestly thought that black people were not real men. They were subhuman and that is terrible. But it explains why they treated them poorly. Now, they're supposed to be equal but they're still treated the same way. To me, that's worse. Still, nothing I said here was false. As far as the norm for them being treated kindly, I said that it was not the norm. Again, please read my post before you respond. But they were treated nicely in some cases, which you would not even recognized and still do not. I never said that the owners actually cared about them. I said they were treated well. I know the context in which I found this quote, but it doesn't make it any less true. You still seem to think that I see slavery as a good thing, which I don't. I'm just pointing out things that you refuse to see. And again, about the houseslaves, I took back the majority. But some were treated well and you still refuse to see that. Please, read my posts if you have something to say about them. The fact that there is evidence to what I said is that it is true. Part of the reason there is not more published on this is because the stories are few and far between. But part of the reason is that people wouldn't accept it. No one should trust ANYONE's history of any event. Thucydides wrote the History of the Peloponnesian War, the most accurate historical text of the time period. And even he says it's flawed and not all the facts are there. The same is true of slave testimonials. I'm not saying they're all lying, but I don't think they're all 100% accurate either. I hope you will at least read this post and recognize where I made my mistakes and that I have admitted this. However, I was still not offbase with any of it. I exaggerate the numbers and that's what I'm guilty of. And please, I would like you to still find something on this thread that I made up.
Damn, that boy's a douche. People can think whatever they wan't to think. When the government starts to regulate though, thats when I either join the revolution or pack my bags and leave. "Would you like me to get naked and start the revolution?" "gulp " "I'll take that as a maybe!" - Orange County
It is to nobody in particular that I am refering, Miss English major. It's like a catch phrase, if you will... "Will what?" "Will? I dont know anybody named Will."
That should be "It is nobody in particule to whom I am referring." And I'm a Political Science major thank you! it was just a question...please don't get mad
