White Supremacy can't last forever can it?

[franksumatra]

While watching Ken Burn's fantastic documentary on Jack Johnson, the world's first Black Heavyweight Boxer, I pondered on how times have changed, some for good, some for bad.

Guys like Jack Johnson were warriors on the front lines of the battle against White Supremacy in America. And Martin Luther King and Muhammad Ali continued the fight, King was murdered, Ali bloodied but still standing.

Manifest Destiny, the conquering of the North American Continent by White Europeans, the slaughter of the Native peoples, the enslavement of the African, Jim Crow laws, White backlash, lynchings, mass imprisonment of poor blacks, and drug addicted criminals, White Supremacy still exists, in full power.

Can you imagine a Black President? It's only a dream of course, because America's 'not ready' for a black man giving orders. 'Not ready', is another way of saying, 'No way'.

This can't go on forever can it? No, it can't, not mathematically, or sociologically, the white man is slowly but surely losing his grip on the worlds non white peoples. It's as inevitable as the next tsunami, NOTHING lasts forever, nothing.

But man o man, the white man is going to put up one hell of a fight to prevent this from happening. We could take the Israeli route, and build a giant wall around all our borders, to keep the Mexicans out, except to slave in our bean fields, but that's not practical.

The supreme rule of the white man is coming to an end in the near future, and it scares him. He's not looking forward to sharing his committee rooms with scary Black men, and he dreads seeing his white sister marrying a Black man. Not even the racially androgynous Colin Powell is good enough to be the first Black American President, and he really tries hard to please his white masters.

It can't go on forever, that's a fact. Little white rednecks are shaking in their cowboy boots all across the nation, strutting and swaggering in public, but quivering and sniveling in the shadows.

[orpupilofnature57]

1. Can a sub-standard thinker be voted president, by college educated

people with children, and that believe in an all knowing,loving god?NAH,,, no way.

[bryant69]

2. I don't know

The assumption in this post is that white people have the same interest and more or less the same desires--A lot of white people, more than you might assume, do want to see a colorblind society when it comes to political matters.

Bryant
Check it out --> http://politicalcomment.blogspot.com

[AG78]

3. As a white guy

I could care less who has the power, as long as they use it right.

Break everyone down, we're all the same. We've got corrupted white leaders here, and there are corrupted black leaders in Africa as well. There are those of any color that will take advantage of power. There are also those of any color that will use that power to help the most people possible.

It's humans vs. profits. Both sides have all the colors of the rainbow. I have been, am, and always will be on the human side.

[Boosterman]

18. What he said eom

[franksumatra]

20. Some humans are total scum, and they come in all colors

So color isn't a factor when you level it down to decent humans versus total scum humans.

Someone here pointed out that children don't have such divisions based on color and ethnicity in the playground. Wish we could channel that playground mentality into our adult lives.

[jdj]

61. I think the answer is inter-racial breeding.

Pretty soon, everyone will be beige and bi-sexual. And the world will be a happier place. We're only allowed to be at the top of the food chain when it comes to inane things like animal research and trips to the moon but when it comes to human relations "we're just animals".. It's really getting old, that old saw.

[ErinGoBraghLess]

4. White Society

You know, white people have contributed far more to this world than the evil disgusting things you list. So how about a little application of the fairness doctrine. Western Europe and the U.S. have made major contributions in science, medicine, the arts, technology, the legal system, education, the end of slavery, and on and on. Western society is so far ahead of the Third World, including most of Africa, in all of these areas that it is not even arguable. So to imply that we're just a bunch of rednecks clinging to power is insulting and demeaning. I have no problem with blacks in positions of power.

It seems that instead of taking advantage of the huge opportunities in this country, you would rather sit back and dream about a time when black folks are in power. And based on the tone and tenor of your post, I get the impression that you can't wait to start dishing out some of the bad s**t you think has been done to you. How will that make the world any better? More fair? More equitable?

[franksumatra]

5. 1st off, I'm caucasion, & racism has never been 'done' to me...

And I'm not dreaming of a black controlled world either. Just an equal playing field.

Sorry I insulted and demeaned you, shit happens.

[Voltaire]

6. Ahhhhh.....as they lose their grip on power

NOW they want fairness and justice. Ain't that typical. It ain't just the loss of power that they fear....though that's huge. Its the payback, because karma is a BITCH. And white men have been wreaking havoc on this planet since it cooled off. Whites have a lot to answer for and you know who's fault it is. . . .

[forgethell]

14. Why should

white men be better than anybody else? All men have been wreaking havoc on the planet. White men just learned to do it better. The "noble savage" is a myth. Even the most primitive people has violence and destruction in their cultures.

headhunters, cannibals, raids for women, rape, human sacrifice.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

8. Well, one reason for the devastation in "3rd world' countries is because

of white domination over the native people. South Americans had made great advances but then the Spaniards went and murdered them. Same thing happened all over the world. Minoritiets were kept poor while Europeans made up the elite class. Considering this is still the case in some places, it is not fair to point to the minority underclass as inferior.

[ErinGoBraghLess]

10. White domination

First off, I didn't mean to get tempers flaring so early in the morning. Maybe this isn't a good topic for DU.

The idea that white domination is what makes the 3rd World lag behind is silly. Are whites in power in the African countries? In the Middle East? The main reason those countries are lagging is that the countries do not have free markets, democracy, and the rule of law to protect ownership of property. They are (by and large) either corrupt governemnts or dictatorial governments that do not encourage free markets and capitalism. Without freedom and rights, it is very tough to have a successful economy. You can't blame it all on whitey.

You know what the biggest thing we can do to help black America? Let's start talking about (or yelling about) education. And I'm not talking about affirmative action at some law school. I'm talking inner city schools with little kids. Why isn't our leadership demanding answers there? Why aren't Jessie and Al organizing marches to demand better schools? Every four years, the candidates come to black churches and pretend to undertand, then they go away. Does anyone really believe John Kerry when he says he listens to rap? Gimme a break! He's pretending as much as the others. So don't tell me I'm some spoiled whitey clinging to power. I think we need to bring everyone up in this society.

[franksumatra]

11. ErinGoBraghLess ....love that name....

I don't blame it ALL on whitey, but the white man needs to grow some humility and learn some self control. Many white folks feel superior because they were raised that way, and they don't even realize it.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

12. Whites were in power in many African countries for a long time

How can you have capitalism when only a few people hold almost all of the money?

[forgethell]

30. But they haven't

been for a long time now, too. You have capitalism by respect for the rule of law and for property rights. You build the institutions. The wealth will be created by the limitless resources of the unchained human mind, same as in Western countries.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

34. 1994 to present is a long time?

The per capita income of whites were 10,6 times higher than African per capita income in 1946/47. It was 15 times higher in 1975. Wealth was redistributed upwards from poor blacks to rich whites.
Between 1975 and 1991, the income of the bottom 60 per cent of the population dropped by about 35 per cent.
In 1996, the poorest 20 per cent of income earners received only 1,5 per cent of total income in South Africa, while the top ten per cent had 50 per cent of total income.
In 1995, the poorest 20 per cent of households received only three per cent of all household income, while the richest 20 per cent of households had 65 per cent.
In 1995, the poorest 30 per cent of households received only five per cent of all household income; the poorest 50 per cent received only 11 per cent; the poorest 60 per cent received only 16 per cent; and the poorest 80 per cent had only 35 per cent.
For the first three quarters of the century, per capita spending on pensions, health and housing for Africans was about ten times smaller than on whites. By 1990, it was still four times smaller.
In 1970 spending on education for a white pupil was 20 times higher than spending on an African pupil.


http://www.anc.org.za/ancdocs/pubs/whip/whip31.html

[forgethell]

37. I was responding

to this statement: Whites were in power in many African countries for a long time. . Decolonization took place in the 50s and 60s for the most part. Blacks have been in power in Africa for that long and have the responsibility to get their societies working like they want them to.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

43. How are they supposed to do that when they are in absolute poverty?

[forgethell]

50. In a country that

respected property rights, there would be significant foreign investment. Money would become available.

[ErinGoBraghLess]

51. You are right!

As it stands now, the US donates a ton of money to these poor countries to "help" them, but the vast majority of the money is skimmed off the top by the corrupt leaders. What money is left is spent on goods, but that doesn't help to create a system whereby these folks can stand on their own. If these countries had free markets and honest governments, foreign investment would pour in and an economic framework would take root. When the colonists came to this country, they were poor and starving too. It would not be overnight success in these countries, but it would happen. Africa is so rich in resources that it would easily succeed. What it also needs to trade partners, not outright charity. You know -- teach a man to fish and all that.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

53. You have got to be kidding me.

Do you realize what a task nation building is? If anything, Iraq should be a big hint.

Saying that a country with free trade would be economically prosperous is like saying a world without hate would not have war. Yeah, it's a great idea, but actually putting it into practice takes a great deal of time, patience and sometimes force. Just saying it without backing it up with qualifying statements makes it seem easier than it is.

[forgethell]

55. Trade is nice

but what is needed is respect for the rule of law and property rights. And who is ging to supply the force? Not the US, we're stretched thin at the moment. no, it is up to the people of Africa, or wherever, to build their own institutions. If the institution is expropriation of valuable property because "whitey" owns it, they will forever be mired in poverty, deservedly so. If the institution is the establishment of the rule of law, then within a generation they will have undreamed of prosperity.

Cause & effect.

[el_gato]

27. You act like you have never even heard of Colonialism

The rape and pillage of Africa and the "New World" as well as colonial efforts in India and China have a legacy that exists to this very day.
You need to bone up on your history.

The middle east is a perfect example that maybe you know something about. The past hundred years has been characterized by western capital support of dictatorial puppet regimes. Do you think you can ignore all of this?

Take Venenzuela for example. The country has been ruled by an elite of european origin for a very long time and now somebody, Chavez, comes along of indigenous descent and starts to do things a little more equitably. Who funds the opposition? That's right western capital. Coming back to the race issue you can't really separate western capital from rich white men.

[DrWeird]

39. Standard white supremacist rhetoric.

Look at all the wonderful inventions white people have come up with: gunpowder, the printing press, they discovered the New World, yada yada yada.

And ignoring all the horrible things white people have done. Oh, the problem with the third world coutries is their own people. They're just inferior.

:eyes:

[ErinGoBraghLess]

46. White supremacist?!

Do you really feel you know me well enough to call me a white supremacist? That is absolutely outrageous. So if I say that western european culture is advanced in comparison to the Third World, that is me being a white supremacist? Total absolute hogwash. And I never said third world countries were lacking because their people are inferior. Never said that. I said it is the fault of the governments being repressive and there being no rule of law to recognize and protect private property.

I stand by my original comments that western society has prospered and flourished compared to the third world. Not because of the inherent superiority of white people, but because our system of government has allowed it to flourish. Where would you rather be if you had a heart attack and needed medical treatment: the U.S. or (take your pick of 3rd world countries)? Who has better roads and infrastructure? Who produces more food? Who has the higher standard of living? Who has more advanced technology? Who creates 90% of the new drugs to cure and manage disease? Who has better production of goods and services? Who has longer life spans? Who has better colleges and universities? Who respects (and legally protects) civil rights better? I could go on and on, but you get the point. Actually, you probably don't get the point, but that is your own fault.

[DrWeird]

47. I haven't called you anything.

I'm just pointing out you're using their rhetoric.

[solinvictus]

71. Ummmm...

Slavery, as an institution, has only been condemned and abandoned by the West. There are small numbers of real slaves, through immigration and the sex trade, but by and large it is not tolerated here or in Europe. At this moment, chattel slavery is still going strong in Africa as Moslems kidnap and enslave those outside their faith. In Asia, girls and children are grist for the sex trade abroad while in India, caste slaves still exist.

[forgethell]

16. You mean like the Aztecs

with no wheels, no metallurgy other than of gold, massive human sacrifice to a (gasp!) ... God? Then cannibalism of the bodies of the sacrifices in great feasts?

You know, the Spaniards didn't conquer the Aztecs all by themselves, but had a lot of help from the Aztec's IMPERIAL subjects who were tired of being the featured attraction at the Aztec worship services.

[franksumatra]

17. Those rotten Aztecs and Olmecs and Mayans, they BEHEADED people

I love it when modern anthropologists look in horror at the Aztecs.
We are EXTREMELY similar to them, even now in the 21st century. And we all know that all that's left of them is their huge monuments to their gods and leaders.

[Boosterman]

21. Ya know I am curious about something.

The people that were the subject races of the Aztecs...the ones they sacrificed...do you suppose they bickered amongst themselves over petty differences? Did they argue until the priests came to take them to the altars? Or did they band together and try and help one another? Anyone know?

[franksumatra]

23. I'm no expert but...

I think folks just got tired of being slaughtered and starving and at war all the time and when the food ran out, they locked up and left. Aztecs sometimes raided neighboring villages and basically conquered people to use their resources and sacrifice them to the gods. and they invented football.

[Bridget Burke]

54. The subject peoples (not "races") did band together ....

against the Aztecs. Unfortunately, they banded together with Cortez.

The Aztec civilization was admirable in many ways, but their reliance on human sacrifice was a bit excessive. Not that the other American cultures didn't also sacrificd humans. (And not that my own ancestors didn't--smothering, slitting the throat & tossing in the bog was the preferred method.)

[forgethell]

28. They ATE them.

Somehow, not so similar.

[DrWeird]

41. I don't think modern anthropologists do that at all.

I think they're quite impartial of other peoples practices and customs.
And I believe if you'll ask modern anthropologists, the only well documented instance of human cannabilism occured among the Kuru (?) of New Guinea, who ritualistically ate their dead as a form of mourning.

Not exactly you're crazed savage bone-in-the-hair view of cannabilism, is it?

[forgethell]

57. No, it is

pretty well documented that Aztecs in Mexico, and the Anasazi in the USA ate people. I think, if you look, you will find that the theory that there really was no large amount of cannibalism in human history to be pretty well discredited. But I guess it depends on which sources you choose to believe, whether you believe that, or not.

Frankly, I have no doubt that it did.

[Blue Wally]

69. Cannabalism appears in societies

Where there are insufficient sources of protein. New Guinea is a classic case where hunting and domestic animals are an insufficiently large factor in the economy and there is a protein deficiency in the daily diet. The Aztecs ate dogs as well to try and get some protein in their diet. Eurasians have excellent sources of protein in wheat (and to a lesser extent rice), legumes, soy beans, and a wide variety of large bodied domestic animals.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

25. How about the Incas and Mayans?

But no, if it is not the Western definition of "developed" it must not count right?

But since you brought up Aztecs, let's look at their horrible, hideous society:

-terraced agriculture
-irrigation
-raised fields
-HIGHLY developed metallurgy, I don't know where you dug up the gold "fact", BUT they were extremely skilled in gold, silver, bronze, copper, and lead has even been found among ruins.
-elaborate system of government
-social system consisting of four classes
-accurate calender
-Nahuatl language

and so on and so on.

Cortes was the one who rallied all of the smaller communities against the Aztecs.

[forgethell]

29. Do you have a point? n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

33. Yes. Your information was incorrect.

[forgethell]

36. You mean

about EATING people? No, I don't think so.

I think I said nothing about terraced agriculture, irrigation, or raised fields, but so what? People gotta eat their veggies and grains, too. Meat (human) isn't everything. And I see no moral or social judgments to be made about agriculture.

HIGHLY developed metallurgy?? Granting the gold, silver, copper, bronze, and lead, Where the hell was the iron and steel??? They didn't even bother to make weapons from their bronze. Weren't their swords basically clubs with obsidian inserts??

Elaborate system of government?? So what? Hitler had an elaborate system of government. Stalin, and every monstrous Communist dictator such as Mao, Castro, etc., had an elaborate system of government. Even primitive little tribes with a chieftainship have systems of government as elaborate as they need.

Social system consisting of 4 classes?? As progressives, aren't we against that sort of thing? Are you including the slaves? Where do the human sacrifices and edibles fit into this system??

Accurate calendar. OK, I grant you that, and it means just what?

Nahuatl language. Great. We've got English, Spanish, Russian, Chinese, etc. What human society doesn't have a language??

As for your last comment: Would Cortes have been able to rally the other tribes against the Aztecs if they were happy being eaten? I don't think so.

Finally, chew on this for a while. Have any other people, other than the evil white man, that you know about, ever been ....imperial? Has there never been a war, somewhere, that the evil white m an was not involved in, either fighting or stirring it up??

Were there no wars in the New World before 1492? No wars is the Far East? Did the evil white man stir up Genghis Khan and the Mongols to conquer half the world, or did they get that bright idea by themselves?.

What about the tribes that lived in New Guinea? They also practiced cannibalism, and not 500 years ago, either.

In 1958-1961, I lived in the Philippines. During the 2 1/2 years that I was there, newspapers reported 2 or 3 times a year about some visitors to the north of the island of Luzon losing their heads to the friendly residents up there, the Igorot tribe (who also had terraced agriculture by the way). That was 60 miles from where I lived. My childhood nightmares involved them making a raid south and getting me.

The pastor of a church in the city of Manila was a confessed Moro (Muslim) pirate and murderer before his conversion to Christianity. From his pulpit he told how he had believed that for every Christian he killed, he would have another slave in heaven.

Buddy, it is not white men who are evil, it is all humanity. Any group, given the power, can be opportunistic, exploitative, violent. In other words, close to nature. The beauty of the Western world is that it provides us with the material resources to rise above that, if we choose. No more throwing Grandma out in snow when the Inuit tribe had a bad hunting month. No more exposing defective babies for the wolves. No more chattel slavery or bondage to the land. No more being compelled to follow your father's trade.

[Famine]

26. You think the Aztec's were doing great?

Not to excuse the Spaniards who were definitely pirates but the Aztecs were cutting the hearts out of their prisoners and the Mayans were tossing jewel laden maidens down wells when Cortez arrived. Maybe you think human sacrifice and slavery were "better" than what western civilization brought but you have to admit that kind of stuff would be really looked down upon now, even in South America.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

31. Anachronistic.

You can't place our values on the society of others. See my other post. Aztec society was bloody, but it was a functioning society. Further, there were other groups that were not bloody and were still slaughtered. That was 500 years ago. Now their descendents are facing the challenges imposed on them by centuries of white rule and for no other reason than they happen to belong to the wrong crowd.

[forgethell]

40. Functioning society, yes,

they had one. So does America under the * administration. So we should just be satisfied with that, eh? One day the Aztecs were overthrown by a few Spaniards and a whole lot of unhappy indigenous people. They did have the right to revolt, didn't they? The Spaniards just gave them a little help. Of course, they paid for the help a little later, but that's irrelevant to the actual event.

And before you flame me about my second sentence, yes, there are things dysfunctional about American society. Also European society, Muslim society, Japanese society, Chinese society. Are you seeing a pattern here? But they all work, some much better than others. I'll let you decide which is which, but don't bother pointing out all the injustices of American society. They are irrelevant to the discussion.

[DrWeird]

42. Compare that to the Spanish Inquisition...

who at the time were busy burning maidens at the stake for which craft, and stretching people on the rack for the heresay of claiming the earth revolved around the moon.

[forgethell]

56. But not nearly so many. n/t

[SemiCharmedQuark]

58. You are mistaken.

It is believed the Aztecs sacrificed about a quarter of a million people. Between all religious deaths, you are looking at the deaths of...many more.

3-5 thousand in the Inquisition

60,000 dead in the European witch hunts
70,000 dead in the St. Bartholomew's day massacre
1 million dead in the Albigensian Crusade
7 million dead in the Saracen slaughters

[DrWeird]

60. Not to mention...

that the Aztec civilization dwarfed it's contemporary European civilization in size.

[forgethell]

63. No, no, no, no, no, no, no.

We are talking only about the Spanish Inquisition. Or, I could throw in the Olmecs, etc., too in order to bumb my totalt up.

What are the "Saracen slaughters"? If you are talking about the Crusades, well, the Saracens killed plenty of people themselves. And remember, the Christians were just trying to reclaim their land from the Arab imperialists who had sstolen it from the Byzantines. I mean it all is in how you look at it. But the way I look at it is going to war to capture people to sacrifice to your Gods, and then eatng them, is about the worst excuse there is.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

64. Go ahead and "bump up your totals"

Every one of the massacres I listed was done for religious purposes.

Explain to me how killing someone because God told you to is better than killing someone to sacrifice to your God (because God told you to).

Further, these aren't even all of the religious wars.

[forgethell]

65. Just maybe there

were some other reasons and religion was only an excuse?? On the other hand, the Europeans did not EAT their captives.

[SemiCharmedQuark]

66. No, they only burned and desecrated their bodies.

But they didn't eat them!

[forgethell]

67. Well,

there it is.


:7

[Connie_Corleone]

9. Well, if western society had left Africa and third world countries

alone, they wouldn't be so messed up today. Have you heard of imperialism??

[Blue Wally]

70. Much of Africa was colonized for less than 100 years

Until ther late 19th century, Eurpoean nations held only small coastal enclaves. Finalnd was colonized first by Sweden, then by Russia for nine hundred years, yet their language survived intact and they got a functional society going very quickly after 1917.

[el_gato]

19. uh...hello, how do you think the "third world" came about?

I would suggest a few books for you:

Blaut, J. M.,The Colonizers Model of the World: Geographical Diffusionism and Eurocentric History. New York: Guilford Press, 1993.

Late Victorian Holocausts: El Nino, Famines, and the Making of the Third World. Mike Davis. New York: Verso, 2001

Abu Lughod, Janet, Before European Hegemony: the world system A.D. 1250-1350. New York: Oxford University Press 1989.

Wallerstein, Immanuel, The Modern World-System: Capitalist Agriculture and the Origins of the European World-Economy in the Sixteenth Century. New York: Academic Press 1974.

Wallerstein, Immanuel. The Modern World-System, II: Mercantilism and the Consolidation of the European World-Economy, 1600-1750. New York: Academic Press, 1980.

Wallerstein, Immanuel, The Modern World-System, III: The Second Era of Great Expansion of the Capitalist World Economy, 1730-1840s. New York: Academic Press, 1989

[semillama]

62. I would add Eric Wolf

Europe and the People Without History.

I'm constantly amazed that people don't recognize that events in the past have strong effects on the present and future.

It's like expecting that all discrimination will cease once you make it illegal. That stuff has cultural momentum, as Eringobraghless (great moniker, btw) aptly and unwittingly displayed.

As far as cannibalism goes, as an archaeologist, I think it happened for sure in the Americas but was never a very common practice. I think there's evidence for some form of cannibalism in every culture - Donner Party anyone?

and for an archaeological note on the cities of America, note that the Mississippian capitol of Cahokia at its peak contained more inhabitants than London at that time. The Aztec city of Tenochtitlan floored Cortes and his men, in terms of the engineering that went into constructing it.

The use of the wheel is not a valid argument, either. The wheel was not unknown to at least the Maya, but when you don't have draft animals, then you don't have the wheel.

Of course, "Western Society" hasn't practiced any form of ritual cannibalism for a while, but it was only 140 years ago that it was legal to own people in this country, and we're still reeling from the negative effect of that on our culture. And of course, without the concept of private property, you couldn't have slavery. Think about that. Women weren't given the right to vote until the 20th century. Forced sterilizations were performed on Native Americans into the 1970s. Western Societies have their own forms of barbarism.

AS far as western society being so great, we have nothing on eastern society. Europe was a mass of howling barbarians when the Chinese were just peaking.

[kk897]

48. Uh, I hope your post was facetious

If not, read Howard Zinn.

[kk897]

49. to clarify, my response was to ErinGB NT

[KharmaTrain]

7. Your Myopism Is Showing...

Our media and "culture" as "whitened" history as viewed by Europeans and progressed marked on their level (eg: gunpowder or explorations), thus the accomplishments of other cultures are still never given the proper credit in our society as it is in others.

Next, there's the religious element...especially these days. Xtian American needs somehow to show its superiority over not just other cultures but even among their own sects. This strongly reflects in our view of other cultures as granting that these other non-Xtian societies are more advanced means the Xtian world isn't superior, and this can't be tolerated.

Lastly, Racism is as American as apple pie and used by all political factions to rally their bases. Democrats draw issues now more on a social/economic level while Repugnicans use it for strictly political and viseral purposes.

Pandering to ethnic groups was a key ingredient in the past election and it was as much shooting down other groups to build up the one the politician was trying to pander to as it was to try to solve problems these groups face. Fortunately, the Repugnicans remain in a Jim Crow mentality that will shrink their power in years to come as the definition of who is a "repugnican" or "conservative" narrows further and further...and yes, more racism to follow.

[forgethell]

13. And, of course,

it may not be the black man that takes over. I don't know for a fact, but I would suspect that very few Mexicans, or other Hispanics, think of themselves as 'black', unless they actually are.

[franksumatra]

15. White Supremacy is Big Tent enough to include Mexicans

You hear their panic all the time, 'english is the official language', 'borders need to be tightened', 'arab terrorists can come in through mexico calling themselves manuel or earnesto'.

They are probably more afraid of Mexicans than Blacks in some areas of America.

[forgethell]

32. Actually, Mexicans

who try to assimilate are very successful at it. I have some neighbors that, if you could talk to them without seeing them, you would think were native-born white Alabamans. They have solid middle class jobs, middle-class behovior, and lots of middle-class friends.

[MadHound]

22. No it can't, and it is slowly but surely crumbling away as we watch.

The proof of this statement lies in what is going on in our society right now.

For centuries, ever since Bacon's Rebellion and other biracial revolts in the late 1600s, the power elite in this country have played the race card hard in order to keep the underclass of both races divided and at each others' throats rather than their own. The break down of this policy started in the fifties, and really took hold in the late sixties and early seventies. White people and black people were looking at each other wondering why the hell they were fighting each other, when their common oppressor, the power elite, was holding both groups down. This scared the shit out of those in that power elite, and realizing that the old race based control mechanisms were breaking down, they decided to come up with another divisive control tactic. Thus they turned to religion, fundementalism.

Up until the early seventies, fundementalist believers stayed out of politics, believing that it was a tainted tool of man, and not Godly at all. This changed in the early seventies. Roe v Wade and other progressive policies were seized upon as signs that this country was heading to hell in a handbasket. This divisive wedge was continously hammered on by the power elite, especially those in the conservative camp. Previously non-voting fundementalist blocks were politicized throughout the seventies, eighties and nineties. This first paid benefits with the election of Reagan, and again with the election of Shrub. It has also bred a mindless support for any military action, and a mindless hate for anything else than their own narrow brand of fundementalism.

While race is a control lever still used by the power elite to keep the underclasses divided, it's effectiveness has been diminished as racism fades, slowly but surely with each generation. The new control lever, one that is gaining in effectiveness, is division along religious lines. We are already seeing the power elite play the religious card in politics, and if we don't act religion will continue to divide us in the future, much like race did in the past.

[Solomon]

24. The war in Iraq is all about white supremacy.

The election of George Bush is all about white supremacy.

Because we are multi-racial now, people get very confused. White supremacy is a state of mind. The confusion shows itself when Bush brags about putting Condi Rice and Colin Powell in positions of power.

The fact that they are non-white doesn't mean that they aren't pursuing white supremacy goals.

The white man must be in charge of all the oil. We will invent every reason under the sun to justify it.


Yes, white supremacy is crumbling, at least overseas. It's still very much alive and well right here in the USA.

It used to be that whites could get away with saying anything. It was true because they said it. I've noticed that change recently, at least with respect to other countries.

When Bush said Bin Laden did it, the Taliban said show us evidence.
(Of course we didn't, just bombed the hell out of them)

When Bush said there were WMD's in Iraq, the world said prove it. There's a healthy air of distrust of anything we say now.

In fact, the only people who believe our bullshit now is us. Thus most of the media is geared to brainwashing the american public. They know that the rest of the world won't buy it.

What kills me is when people get indignant about attitudes other countries have towards us. The most recent example being Indonesia, which apparently fears american presence there more than the Tsunami.

Are we the only people who really believe we are "helping" other people when we show up? It's ironic that we get indignant because we don't know history whereas the other countries know all too well what lies behind american "help".

[Karenina]

35. HI SOLOMON!!!!

:hi: :loveya: :hi:

The invasion of Iraq is just the beginning of Amurika's "race war."

Who ya gonna believe? A *dauphin (claim he PURE WHITE related to the Queen and ALL... Did you know he Poppy spent ALL KIND O' GREENBACK to trace dey "heritage" back to da MANGER???) who say SADDAM a BRUTAL DICTATOR ARMED AND DANGEROUS or that nassy sand nigger towelhead who say he not (never mind all he neighbors who said they didn't lose no sleep)?

Sand nigger tole da TRUF???? OOOOPS!!!

It worked quite effectively, eh?

[DrWeird]

38. White supremacists never went anywhere.

Desegregation was only forty years ago. Most of those white supremacists who tried to shout out little black kids from entering schools are still around, and they're voting republican. They didn't go anywhere, they just went underground where their racism is hard to see. Yes, these people will eventually die. But they're still teaching their kids. That's why people are still electing racists like Trent Lott.

[proud patriot]

44. Amazing Documentary

I think racism is still very strong in America ,
but it dwells just below the surface , hidden .


edited to qualify myself , I'm a white suberban
housewife. :shrug: not that that makes a difference
one way or another .

[PROGRESSIVE1]

45. !!!LOS LATINOS AMERICANOS!!!

"Little white rednecks are shaking in their cowboy boots"

Oh they will be shaking and crapping AND hiding behind the stands at NASCAR when the time comes!

[kk897]

52. sadly, with the RW extremists working mainly behind the scenes...

Yes, *mainly* behind the scenes. Most of us only see the tip of the iceberg. Watch them infiltrating the educational system and the electoral system. They're getting them while they're young, then when they're old enough to vote they're taking away their true voice and substituting their own. Soon it will be self-perpetuating.

And it does start young. This is only anecdotal, but here's a little bit of evidence:

I was about 5 or 6 and I *loved* Michael Jackson (ah, the folly of youth). I was playing with some other little girls when one asked who we wanted to marry. I said Michael Jackson, and the other little girls laughed nastily.

"You can't do that!" one exclaimed.

"Why not?" I asked.

"Because he's a n-----!" she said derisively, wrinkling her nose.

Baffled, I responded, "nuh uh!" and she said "yuh huh!" and I said, "I can marry whoever I want!" and stomped home.

I had no idea what she meant. None whatsoever. I asked my mom, who explained and told me that we should never think bad things about a person because of the color of their skin.

It seemed ridiculously stupid, so outlandish, that anyone would use a "bad word" about someone because of their skin color. To me, skin color was just another feature, like color of eyes, weight, height, gender...people just looked different from one another. I couldn't even imagine that people would be "mean" to someone based on a physical feature.

You know, it still seems utterly and completely stupid and it still baffles me.

[SmokingJacket]

59. One day races will disappear.

We'll all be a similar shade of brown. I saw a picture of "future Earthling" on the cover of Time magazine when I was kid, and lemme tell ya, what a beautiful picture.

Won't happen in any of OUR lifetimes, of course, but it's inevitable.

[poe]

68. thanks for the post the western habit of mind is destroying the planet

the so called opportunities in america are A)non-existent for most;B)obtained at the expense of others, mostly brown-skinned others;C)not good for the planet even if those achievements were a possibility for all.

2 things, at least, to consider: 1)there is not a single recorded incident of an Indian returning to the White Man's world when released from capture and there are numerous recorded incidents of whites returning to the Indian world, Ben Franklin among others remarked on this; 2)every single pocket of biodiversity that is remaining on earth corresponds precisely with where their are remaining indigenous populations and all these people are brown skinned. no exceptions. ask yourself why.