Sigh....
The biggest argument for this is that Obama received 95% of the African American vote in the election. Of course, this is a group that is almost stereotypically Democrat, and this percentage is only a little bit higher than, oh, Kerry, and Clinton those two times (can't find anything but an editorial saying that Gore won 9/10ths of the black vote, which is approximately as much as Kerry and Clinton won). So, already, that doesn't hold much water, unless you think it is racist of them to simply vote Democrat. However, it is hardly racist for people to vote for a member of their minority group, especially when the person voted for will be the first one of your group to ever be allowed to reach that level of power in the country. I can hardly imagine that anyone else in a similar position wouldn't be inclined to vote the same way (unless, of course, the candidate didn't have the best interests of the other groups they happen to be a part of in mind...).
Oh, but here is the kicker: even if these people were "racist" against white people...it doesn't matter! Do you know why? Not only would that racism be a mere reaction against legitimate wrongdoing (albeit, holding a bit too much of a grudge, but still understandable), but white people, being a majority with legislative and social power on their side, do not suffer at all as a result of it. At least not in a way comparable to what would be suffered by traditional racism against groups which could actually be persecuted. "Racism" against people in a position of power and large number is essentially impotent, a far cry from real racism.
If I only had a nickel everytime a hear some white guy on the internet, whining about how unfair it is that people who we only began to treat as equals 30 years ago are allowed to be bitter. I might be able to afford a goddamn can of soda. Possibly. I don't know how much the prices have gone up since this morning...
16 comments:
Let's assume, for sake of arguement, Obama got 100% of the black vote.
He still needs a significant amount of votes....that's why they are considered a minority, they represent a smaller percentage of the populace.
Still, other minority candidates, in the past did not recieve 95% of the black vote. Anyone remember Jesse Jackson's presidential bids? What happened with that?
"Still, other minority candidates, in the past did not recieve 95% of the black vote. Anyone remember Jesse Jackson's presidential bids? What happened with that?"
My guess? They were unsuccessful ;P
Didn't Al Sharpton also try a shot as well? I'm sure that was brought up contemptfully at some point when they say him tearing up at the inauguration. I don't quite know how much support those two got in the black community, but I am suddenly now recalling the Reverend Wright affair, and how he was being accused of being "racist" (among other things) for whatever convoluted reason. Ridiculous attempts, and I am glad that it affect the uninformed as much as I assumed it would.
They've got some really thin skin. They need to learn how ineffective and unrealistic their delusions of persecution really are.
I dont' understand racism.
Isn't it just as bad if you get ripped off by someone of your race as it is if you get ripped off by someone of another?
Same goes for getting beat up, put down, fired, not hired etc.
I think that on the one hand it's a class thing and at the same time, on the other hand it's a con-game where poor people of one race are told to imagine that 'at least they're not that other race!'.
"Isn't it just as bad if you get ripped off by someone of your race as it is if you get ripped off by someone of another?
Same goes for getting beat up, put down, fired, not hired etc."
Pretty much, yeah. Sometimes, they, you can add a little touch of coercion that you couldn't add unless it wasn't an action based on the oppressor having a different (and more influential) group than the oppressee. Individual actors aren't particularly notable though. But when it becomes widespread, every individual instance serves as its own symbol of one group's superiority over another, and has psychological impact that goes far beyond the two immediate parties involved. It's a truly muddled, messy affair, and far from black and white (is that a pun?).
"I think that on the one hand it's a class thing and at the same time, on the other hand it's a con-game where poor people of one race are told to imagine that 'at least they're not that other race!'."
Neo-nazis wouldn't exist without that sentiment! I mean, have you seen them! They need to convince themselves that they are better than SOMEONE. Racism is the only way that they can manage that...
pboy, I don't understand racism either. (sigh)
I can be pretty certain that a lot of it is geographical though.
I don't understand the date on this post either???
I saved the post, along with 4 others, as a draft when I published the political correctness post. When I published this one today, it displayed the date in which I first typed into it, instead of the date when it actually appeared on the site. A minor annoyance, seeing as how it didn't screw the order of posts up.
It's kind of like the wing nut commentators are saying "ok you got a black president so now we're even."
"ok you got a black president so now we're even."
And pretty much the entire motivation for saying "racism is officially over", or accusing them of being equally/more racist is so that they can lose the veneer of racial sensitivity and say what they REALLY think. They so badly want to be liberated from a history of wrongs, so that they can once more feel free enough to be complete utter dicks to everyone equally. They are the true egalitarians among us.
hmmm egaldicktarians - I like it!
The psuedo-victimization of the majority is pretty sickening in this country. You see it in racism, politics and religion. To hear the religious right talk about it, you'd think that Christians faced the lions during the NFL halftime show.
"you'd think that Christians faced the lions during the NFL halftime show."
Now that, I would watch. We seriously need to get ourselves some gladiatorial combat in this country. (Also, I think I may be touching on the "persecution" thing in a bit, depending on whether I feel like babbling about that new "Speechless: Silencing the Christians" program. The name itself doesn't bode well for quality of content...)
We seriously need to get ourselves some gladiatorial combat in this country.
--------------
I think that extreme fighting stuff is pretty close.
What's this show you mentioned?
Yeah, I guess it's pretty close. Not really enough evisceration for my tastes though...
Also: This program. It's only really being shown on Christian-Only stations, but they also put 'em online too, for our viewing pleasure.
Trying again.
Last link works. The episode they have up right now is about "teh gay agenda", so I think I might springboard off of that.
The gay agenda. I just love bigotry. One way to spot a bigot is anyone who talks about a diverse group of people with a shared trait always having a common agenda that controls all other aspects of their lives. You see it in the Black agenda, the Arab agenda, the gay agenda, the liberal agenda etc. kind of like the Masons I expect.
Jews!!! You left out the Jews! That is the number one group that is proposed to have some kind of sinister agenda. Conspiracy theories abound. Hell, it has gotten to the point that I can't even hear the word "Zionist" without automatically chuckling.
Post a Comment