Saturday, September 10, 2011

More Words of Wisdom

bappie wrote:
Off topic, but where have you been?
Hello to Savant and Harrison. Great thread.
Thanks. But I'm about to kick Zaius' racist butt. Boy is he making a mistake trying to hijack the legacy of Dr. King.
But unlike that racist buffoon, I've studied King. Indeed, I've a book coming soon. King was a REVOLUTIONARY--which is why he was killed. Ever hear of his proposed ECONOMIC BILL OF RIGHTS?
Maybe one of his letters to Coretta Scott (future wife) written July 18, 1952 in which he says "I am more socialistic in my economic theory than capitalistic," Or where he writes (same letter) that "today capitalism has outlived its usefulness."

Conservtive Dr. King? Duh...What flavor Kool Aid is Z drinking?



Freebird USA wrote:
The only issues that are clear is that you are loathe to conceed your oversight, you are an elitist and you assume european social democracy is a superior system of governing. Thats your choice,stay in Europe or go back if you're living in the states. Its NOT what this country is about.If Europe doesn't wise up and kick you social democrats to the curb they will all drown in the multiculutural swill your kind embraces.
Nonethless, you know what the issue was and IS, and you simply latch upon an oversight because you CANNOT debate the REAL issues that are on the table.

As far as "elitism" goes, European social democracy actually allows more choices--and MEANINGFUL choice--than the corporate two party system in America.
And interestingly enough, MORE European ordinary citizens of their respective social democratic republics vote and otherwise participate in the life of the republic.
Most Americans don't vote, probably because our corporate elitist republic which offfers them no meaningful choices (or rarely does)
So, it is YOU who are elitist by your support of corporate elitists politics. Moreover, European social democracy offers not only personal and political freedom--in Scandinavia MORE than we have in America. But it also affords ordinary people economic and social rights only available to the rich in DECENT education and DECENT health care even if you're unemployed or have a modest income.
In fact, in many European countries prostitutes have many rights that ordinary working folk don't have in America. Elitism, you say?



Freebird USA wrote:
You may want to reconsider lecturing others since "WEST GERMANY" ceased to exist after the reunification more than 2 DECADES ago. Perhaps if you had been schooled in Germany you might have known that huh?
Yes, I redfall when the Berlin Wall fell. But Germany still sufffers from the effects of the former division into east and west. Any German can tell you that.
However, I noticed you didn't address my point that Germany suffers LESS from the recession than does the USA. And this is with higher taxation on corporations, greater participation of labor in economic and political life than here, and far greater social legislation--including health care benefits that makes the package passed under Obama's watch seem a paltry affair.
Yet conservativ simpletons think Obama is a socialist, even a Marxist. Which leads to another difference: The level of political literacy is far lower here than in Europe, where you have politicians on the European Right who are to the left of Obama and many other Democrats (not to mention Republicans).
Claims that Obama is a socialist or a Marxist is not only LAUHABLE to democratic socialist like me, but to even an AVERAGE European conservative. Though I regard the European conservative as my adversary as well, they at least have a more INFORMED and intelligent crop of consevatives over there.



soultry-soul1 week agoin reply to Matureblkbbw
Thank you Sistah:)

I'm extremely overjoyed by all my Sistah's coming together (especially on this topic) to Unite and expose our love for our BLACK MEN. These infiltrator's are coming at us under deep-cover and we MUST be very diligent in recognizing them off the back.

Sistahs...lets armour UP!!!



The Scandinavians I've met here are SHOCKED as the rampant poverty in this rich nation. They can't believe the sprawling slums and ghettoes, and millions of American children going to be hungry at night.
One Danish film maker did film called AMERICAN PICTURES in which he revealed to a shocked European audience the unbelievable barbarity with which the poor and treated, and the misery in which millions of Americans live hardly better than the unfortunate inhabitants of some Third World countries.
His film and the book revealed (though he didn't expressly say so) the remarkably CALLOUS American attitudes toward the poor compared to the relatively humane attitudes expressed in his native Denmark. And this was a Danish guy who was decidedly PRO-American.
No, you can not evade the truth by an anti-intellectual dismissal of ideas you don't like as "liberal" bias.


Freebird USA wrote:
Ho hum. I reject Attai and his ideologically based opinions as bing just that. Studies exist that support virtually anything one wishes to support.
No study can prove that the general level of literacy is higher in America than in France of Sweden. No study can show that the quality of life is higher in America than Sweden. No study can show that western Europeans vote in smaller proportions than do Americans. No study can show that Europeans are generally LESS informed and less well read than Americans.
No study can show that western European countries have MORE violent crime than does the USA. No study can show that countries like France, Sweden and Germany TODAY have LESS personal freedom than does the USA.
And every study that I know of indicates the OPPOSITE of all these things instead.
So, like believers in the flat earth theory, or people who--scientific studies notwithstanding--insist that climate chnage is a myth made up by the Democratic Party--you are free to believe whatever you please (even if reason is against you) and disbelieve whatever you please.
But you thereby reveal that peculiar, benighted state of mind once facetiously expressed on a bumper sticker I saw: "My mind is made up. Don't confuse me with the FACTS."
It is said that ignorance is bliss. I will not disturb your bovine contentment.


IdiotsayWhat wrote:

See I respect you Moor because you see the fu___ery from all sides and though we beef sometimes I still have the upmost for you.




-The Moor

BakkByPopularDemand1 week agoin reply to WhatManyPeopleThink
that still doesnt give you the RIGHT to AIR her business does it?

Once again, this post you made goes to directly to my always pushing black folks to own and work for ourselves...We need to keep whites as far away from our livelihood as possible....

Black folks, go to school, get those skills and degrees, and BUILD, instead of WORKING for the enemy...


Paul H. 2 days agoin reply to leon757
You say you "prefer asian women" ...just so I understand, when you need help what community do you turn to? Do you think the asian community or any asian organizations would come to your aid? What about the Indian community? The latino community?

And this is what I don't understand

how we (black males) could see the conditions in our communities,

complain about the conditions in our communities,

expect our (black) communities to be as united as other ethnic communities

are disappointed that blacks don't have a strong business base like other communities

and expect our (black) community to rally around us when the white system puts a foot in our a___s

then we publicly state a preference for any women but our own...

and to still expect things to get better for us and our communities

just ain't logical or sensible



"This was for most of us, our first trip to Scandinavia...We felt we had much to learn from Scandinavia's DEMOCRATIC SOCIALIST TRADITION and from the manner in which they had overcome many of the social and economic problems that still plagued far more poweful and affluent nations. In both NORWAY and SWEDEN, whose economies are literally dwarfed by the size of our affluence and the extent of our technology, they have no unemployment and no slums. Their men, women and children have longed enjoyed FREE MEDICAL CARE and QUALITY EDUCATION. This contrast to the limited, halting steps taken by our rich nation deeply troubled men." (p. 259 of THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR).

Did I hear someone say something about Dr. King's "conservatism"?
Strange that while he was ALIVE conservatives commonly called him subversive and "communist"--as did Ronald Reagan, whom Zaius worships.

Dr. King was a LEFT WING nonviolent REVOLUTIONARY.



LoveSexy528 months ago
AMEN @ sultry-soul, I COULD NOT HAVE SAID IT ANY BETTER. "SHOUT-OUT" to my BLACK MEN!!!! But I will not be forced into dating another race. I just don't have the desire for any other men but black men, been around the others but there's no attraction, NONE!! Give me a strong, tall, bald, respectable Black man.


I consider Maury Povich an enemy of the people.
Anyone that appears on Marty's show are moral giants compared to him, based on the amount of damage he does by mere amplification of his show through broadcasts.

His show and others like it are really bad for society because they encourage class division and hatred towards the underclass: the most disadvantaged, poor, or colored. The Untermenschen.

These shows let people that are feeling bad about their own lives to feel better because they can feel superior to the trailer trash, and the audience encourages the viewers to join in on the demonization. They can now feel like they are part of the √úbermenschen. His show is not merely a mental diversion for a bored, or chronically unemployed, home in the daytime crowd.

If this TV time was used to explore and identify the social pressures and causes of this behavior or the systemic reinforcing problems, we could collaborate on what to do about it, how to effect it in a positive way that doesn't push the problem cost off on someone else. We had a few shows like this at one time.
Phil Donahue explored real problems through discussion, expert input, asking questions. Critical thinking was employed. Systemic problems and exploiters who gained from the status quo were identified. His show was a virtual think tank.

Since then, socially beneficial shows have been replaced with crap like Marty's show - the equivalent of a Barnum and Bailey circus show with ringmaster as host who encourages the viewing audience to look down on the losers, laugh, jeer, point, and judgement is passed.
The target is viewed deserving of everything that has befallen them -- all outside of social context. Empathy is seen as a coddling parasites. Not only should they not be helped in any manner, what is missing is punishment!

Who gains from creating divisions among us?
Take a look at the owners of the TV networks and their agenda; they are multinational conglomerates who own near monopolies in multiple industries: weapons manufacturing, private prison industry, school privatizers, energy and minerals mining, and the huge ever expanding government funded security industry.

By also owning these stations, they control information and News. They block or spin information that is bad for their bottom line. Instead of real news and reporting, not-too-bright stenographers and spokesmodels deliver propaganda, refuse to question authority, deliver the narratives of the village elite, or political party talking points.

They undermine the morals, values and ethical underpinnings of our society, introduce militarism, fear, authoritarianism, xenophobia, tribalism, and political partisanship. It leaves them a free hand to continue hollowing out the American middle class economically and eradicating resistance to total takeover.

Make no mistake: this is psychological and class warfare.
This goes to others crap shows too, like 'You're Fired" with that bankruptcy king (welfare for the rich) and moral failure Donald Trump. He's held up as some kind of savvy Business man who earned his money the hard hard way. -- He inherited it. On that show, they promote unethical dog eat dog tactics, gaining an upper hand is paramount: ends justify means no matter who it hurts. Bosses treating employees like dirt is modelled for us and our kids, and is becoming normalized in our society.

COPS is another one. They pick up small time criminals. Victims of a corrupt system, drug users, and prostitutes.

Instead, I'd like to see a show where creators of financial weapons of mass destruction in the form of credit default swaps get a 20 year sentences. I'd like to see them building railroads, digging ditches, working in vegetable fields, or in unairconditioned sweat shops in Louisiana sewing T-shirts or Levis for 19 cents per hour, like the contract wages they've arranged for the Haitian citizens (not prisoners).

The damage these men did has rippled through the whole country. They have harmed everyone of us, they aren't some little hooker on some street corner who's actions really has no affect on society except to herself. She might even be feeding some kids.

I'd like to see their ill gotten gains clawed back and watch the digital numbers transfer from their accounts, back to the Treasury account.

I'd like to see a show where bankers who were rewarded 12 trillion dollars 0f our money, debt that we will have to pay back, go to jail for gambling with money they didn't have, yet have been rewarded with bonuses for it based on the value of the rotten products they were able to transfer to some sucker who would be left holding the bag when the bomb blew up.
(These bankers bonus contracts can't be torn up, you see. Obama doesn't begrudge these savvy businessmen of their ill gotten gains. Only Teachers and Airline Pilots, stewardesses, or auto workers can be stripped of their hard won and contractually ensured retirements.)

I'd like to see on TV, trials of Government officials who created and normalized our torture regime, who took us to war based on lies, and corrupt officials who enrich themselves while in office followed around and shamed, and yes prosecuted on TV News like Watergate and Iran/Contra scandals.

I'd like to see them frog marched to the prison bus in handcuffs and in orange jumpsuits, with tears of self pity streaming down their dusty cheeks from their swollen little eyes - but this time without the pardons.

I've even thought of a name for this show. We could call it... JUSTICE.


Caribbean girl wrote:

oh down south its a different story the BM in the south love dark skin women, the darker the better. Darkskinned women get alot of love down here from all races too.

-Capricorn Black


Savant wrote:

For those of you who would like a brief but informative cinematic portrayal of King's final campagin in Memphis,check out a doumentary called AT THE RIVER I STAND.
What OhReally's comment overllooks is that there was a STRIKE going on for decent wages and benefits---for the right of impoverished black sanitation workers ot organize and collectively bargain (now under attack from the Right)--and, of course, an end to racial discrimination in the workplace.
Naturally, you'd advise striking workers NOT to return to work, to CONTINUE the STRIKE until victory.
Fortunately, those black workers heeded King's words, and WON the victory...Lesson in the efficacy of solidarity and uncompomising resistance to injustice....Freedom rising!!!!
Of course union busting is the goal of the Tea Party and their ilk, that is why King is viewed as a trouble maker and communist instead of trying to help workers get better working conditions. But then the Tea Partiers act like we can all live on $8 per hour with no healthcare.



funny you say that, because he visited elkhart, indiana 3 times and spoke in front the all white community about how he wants to restore jobs in that town. elkhart is a white community hit hard by the recession with 25% unemployment. whites were griping about losing their jobs or not being able to find work.

Now it's ok for whites to gripe and complain about unemployment, yet we black folks have to shut the F___k and quit complaining. support the president, but dare not burden him with our 16% unemployment and disparity in in the criminal justice system. whites and latinos are hard working people who deserve sympathy if they were affected by the recession, hell they even get a visit from the president. we black folks want what everyone has and yet we need to get up off our lazy a___ and do for ourselfs. I get it now. whites, latinos, homosexuals, progressives, wallstreet bankers, are the only ones who should get support from the obama administration, but blacks, should put up, shut up, cast your vote and dont say another mother____ word.

pretty much. when whites, gays, latinos, and special interest groups complain, I never hear black obama supporters say, "hey he wasnt elected be the whites, gays, latinos, and special interest groups president".

it's just us black folks who are told to cast a vote and shut up : (
Zaius wrote:

Just keep in mind, his "Afrikan" agenda is bringing jungle law to the entire United States, not just Detroit and large parts of Chicago.

You are a funny man. My African agenda revolves around many things. My African agenda is confidence, building communities, having a love of family, and other real concepts. You are a racist of course, so you love to use language like that. Also, Rosemond and Tulsa were black success stories until you know who messed it up. You know who caused terrorism against innocent blacks in those communities of Tulsa and Rosemond. Now, what's happening in Detroit and Chicago is happening in Applachia and across America. It has nothing to do with real black culture (since real black culture deals with unity, growth of families, and black power) or genetics. It has to do with globalization, cultural breakdowns, austerity, bad trade deals, and other socioeconomic factors. I believe in real laws the promote civil liberties and economic justice not neo-con propaganda. You believe in welfare for the super wealthy and I don't. That's one difference between me and you.

Also, you can't take flight from the truth. You can take flight from certain people, but the truth is one thing you can't take flight from.
-By Timothy

Barros Serrano wrote:

All good for the vast majority of the people of the USA and the world, but bad for the elitist rulers who cannot conceive of a world in which they do not run roughshod over the majority to maintain their absurd wealth discrepancy.
And so... Dr. King, Bobby Kennedy, etc., had to go. Imagine if both of them had lived... RFK would have easily been elected President in 1968, and Dr. King would have had a multi-ethnic mass of people holding Bobby's feet to the fire if he faltered while in office...
But noooooooooooooooooooooooo...
In a way, it's ironic. Obama on the cam\paign trail sounded like a young black RFK or a black FDR.
And when he was elected, my friend and fellow philosopher Cornel West said, "I hope Obama is a progressive Lincoln, and I'm the Frederick Douglass who will keep his feet to the firer."
As a Left Christian intellectual, West identifies with the legacy of King; and everybody know he sounds like an educated black preacher. Obama COULD have been similar to FDR, Lincoln or RFK.
But here's the deal: Lincoln, FDR wer faced with progressive movements on the ground (abolitionism & labor respectively). RFK would have had progressive movements on the ground to deal with--more so, if King had lived as well.
But there's no progressive mass movement on a LARGE scale to keep Obama's feet to the fire. And hardly had he taken office when the REACTIONARY Tea Party movement emorged.
Hoping that labor, now under attack, will experience a rebirth o fmilitancy, helping to re-energize progressive meovements. Too bad it wasn't already happening in Nov 2008.



Savant wrote:
....Now the question is: Why did Black "leaders" abandon or water down King's quest for economic justice? Lack of understanding? Myopia? Narrow class interests?
Now...answering THAT question is getting to the 'nitty-gritty' of understanding our contemporary dilemma, brother Savant.

I will suggest that a convergence of all three factors you just mentioned is at work. There always has been, in my opinion, a class schism within the AA community - a division between the lumpen proletariat and the petty bourgeoisie; and a division between the latter and the professional classes; and further division right up to the ultra-elite ranks of the rich.

In one of his prior works, brother Cornel West talks about how the 1970s saw an explosive boom in the collective fortunes of the AA middle class - including, I would add, people like our corporate brother Barack. It seems that removing the lid off the long-suppressed ambitions of bright, upwardly-mobile, ambitious AAs diverted a great deal of otherwise social-reformist talent towards the more narrow interests of self-aggrandizement and conspicuous consumption.

I'm sure there is more to it than just that, but that is what seems apparent to me at the moment...



oh _ ReaIIy ___ wrote:
"in March 1968, one month before his death, King marched with 1,300 striking sanitation workers in Memphis, telling the striking workers to stay strong on the picket line:“Don’t go back on the job until the demands are met,” King said.“Never forget that freedom is not something that is voluntarily given by the oppressor. It is something that must be demanded by the oppressed....If we are going to get equality, if we are going to get adequate wages, we are going to have to struggle for it.”
These people HAD jobs, and MLK told them NOT to go to work....
What happened to King's dream of economic justice, was that it got /Viggered up by bullsht artists whining about oppression instead of being responsible for their own actions.
For those of you who would like a brief but informative cinematic portrayal of King's final campagin in Memphis,check out a doumentary called AT THE RIVER I STAND.
What OhReally's comment overllooks is that there was a STRIKE going on for decent wages and benefits---for the right of impoverished black sanitation workers ot organize and collectively bargain (now under attack from the Right)--and, of course, an end to racial discrimination in the workplace.
Naturally, you'd advise striking workers NOT to return to work, to CONTINUE the STRIKE until victory.
Fortunately, those black workers heeded King's words, and WON the victory...Lesson in the efficacy of solidarity and uncompomising resistance to injustice....Freedom rising!!!!



The 0riginal Doby wrote:
Brother Savant,
This thread is about "what happened to King's dream of economic justice", not about Lloyd Marcus' authority on King. I merely pointed out to you that Marcus defines King as a conservative in his book.
What happened to that dream was realists recognized its flaws. You described the phenomenon as being "watered down", by "self hating" blacks.
Economic "justice" is attained by fostering equal opportunity, which has been accomplished. Economic "equality" is a completely diifferent concept, which requires either a Robin Hood system of taking from the rich and giving to the poor, or participation by the formerly excluded. Economic "inequality" is not the fault of the successful, it's the fault of those who chose to continue to protest that inequality, instead of taking advantage of the opportunity to "equalize" themselves, as you and I, and countless other successful people of color have done.
I didn't say that King's drean of economic justice was watered down by "self hating blacks." Read more carefully. I pondered WHY black leaders either abandoned or watered it down. I suggested lack of understanding, myopia or maybe narrow class interests. Of course, there was also a rightward turn in American politics as the 1970s wore on which reached its peak in the 1980s. That's another piece of the puzzle.
Equal opportunity exists now in law, not in fact.




The 0riginal Doby wrote:

Mr. Marcus currently serves as the chairman for the NAACPC. Prior to that, he lived in a Baltimore high rise. After he moved in, at the age of 10, he watched his home get destroyed by other residents. He was taught that the plight of the black man is the sole fault of the white man. He questioned that notion, and wondered what could be done to keep the white man from sneaking into the building in the middle of the night, and painting grafitti on the walls, breaking the windows, and urinating in the halls. When he grew up, he realized the truth, and began his quest correct the lies he had been taught.
His authority on King is directly credited to his life experience as a black man growing up in the King era, and being intelligent enough to rise about the hype, and seek the truth.
That experience wouldn't give him authority on King, especially not on King's social and political philosophy. It wouldn't verify his claims that King was conservative (if that's his view). At any rate, people from East Baltimore who grew up in the time of King do not all think in the same way. How has Marcus' views any more authority than that others who grew up in aast Baltimore at the same time?(By the way, I encountered VERY FEW Blacks in east Bmore who believed that ALL of the problems of Black America were caused by "whitey". I think it's a MYTH that most Black people think that. They do believe--CORRECTLY--that a large part of the problem is rooted in racism and economic injustice)
As regarding King's philosophy, has honestly studied it? Or does he simply pick words or phrases that suit him to make his point.
I can cherry pick comments from speeches or writings of some Marxists or Anarchists, or revolutionary Blacks like some 1960s Black Panthers.
Overwhelmingly, King was a PROGRESSIVE.


candi_k4 months ago
THANK YOU Stuart for this article. My sentiments exactly!...... and its even worse when some of our Black men exclusively look for light skinned or mixed Black women. Look at Lil Wayne -the ultimate in ignorance- saying "bet that b___ look better red", and has a dark skinned daughter (who now has to grow up knowing her Dad thinks she's not attractive.)

Preference is one thing but some people PURPOSEFULLY look elsewhere. And that is where the self hate comes in.


What gets me is when these Hlouse Negros and modern day mammies decide to date the devil they have to come up with excuses such as:

"Black females have attitudes, it's always 'me, me, me.

White women are more submissive.

White females seem to do more for you and they don't have so much attitude and drama

Black women are lazy Cadillac driving welfare queens, who have kids for money.


There are no available Black men where i live or work.

Most Black men are in jail

Black men don't know how to treat women..etc....

You never hear a devil say ANYTHING negative about a each other when they are in interacial relationships. So why dothese bourgeois, brainwashed braindead Black men and women feed into to justify screwing white folks?

As far as i'm concerned sellout Sanna and Kriss Turner can suck on all the white penis' she wants to, but I would prefer if she don''t take a crap on brothers while doing it.



Timothy wrote:
The truth is that in his early life, Dr. King had some conservative convictions as expressed in his letter to the editor back in the 1950's. Yet, Dr. King evolved by 1968 to being more progressive. For example, Dr. Martin Luther King rejected mainstream capitalism and Communism as either harming the poor or violating human rights. He desired an economic bill of rights and the government to spend billions of dollars to have a radical redistribution of economic & political power. He didn't support either party, but his words, speeches, and literature by the late 1960's proved that he was revolutionary progressive type of man ideology. As for Lloyd Marcus, he is a typical man. Many people of color became more conservative because of the feeling of disallusionment of the liberal establishment. Marcus supports the Tea party.
It seems that unlike Zaius, you've taken some time to INFORM yourself rather tha spouting ungrounded opinions. Yes, King was a revolutionary progressive, though also a nonviolent revolutionary.
As I've not read llyod Marcus' work, I won't try to critique it. But good luck with him trying to prove Dr. King was a conservative, if that's what he's trying to do..
As I said before, you can cherry pick conservative statement from Karl Marx or Bakunin if you wish. The question remains: Was his overall outlook progressive or conservative? King's worldview was, as you put it, revolutionary progressive.

Martin Luther King, Jr. was a REVOLUTIONARY. Give it up, Tea Partiers and Black Republican conservatives. King was NOT one of you.




It also applies to those same whites of European descent that carried out the black African ma'afa and who went on to attack,colonize and war against the yellow people of Asia and the brown and black peoples of the islands of the seas.In antiquity whites tribes, 'Aryans and 'Persians' started a race war with the Black & brown peoples of India to their south & south east & the Black and brown peoples to their south & south west in Mesopotamia ,west Asia & North Africa.


Rebekah Mary wrote:

None of the socialized nations you mention provide for their own national defense in any meaningful way, and despite the US taxpayer footing that massive bill, they are collapsing under the weight of the welfare state anyway. Your big government model was proven wrong by the former USSR and Cuba. Did they not confiscate and spend enough either?
You seem to cling to an ideology that was proven to be horribly un-compassionate and outright wrong decades ago under Jimmy Carter.
Actually, it is America that is collapsing under the weight of regressive forms of taxation, disintegrating infrastructure, health care and education...amd we;fare fp rtje rich. Most industrialized European nations don't have our huge sprawling slums and ghettoes, adn their unemployed often live better than many of our employed. Their ciiizens vote more often, hae more choices from which to vote, are more literate (partly because of their school system, partly because of their values), and have a larger part of the population that is politically informed.
What is compassionless and meanspirited, is the neo-conservative ideology of acquisitivenesss, worship of the market, contempt for human well being, and contempt for the poor and persons of non-European descent.
That is is not clearly undrstood that health care is a human right, is indicative of the social and moral myopis so prevalent in our society.
By the way, those European countries all have armies and navies, so they do spend of defense. but as they're not trying to police the world, it doesn't cost them as much.
The rationae for huge US forces was defense against Communisn. A rationale that should have ended with the collapse of the USSR. But the miletary industrial complex is a vast economic enerprise in its own right, and have taken on a life of its own.

Also, it's a weal ama;ogy to bring the USSR or Cuba into the picture. You must ask why the USA is behind other DEMOCRATIC, industrialized countries. Why is our health care, our education and our infrastructure behind those of Scandinavia or West Germany?



Freebird USA wrote:
Nice fairy tale to cling to as the collective European economy continues its freefall.
Actually, the German economy is more stable than ours. So are the economies of Scandinavia.

And they have universal health care and legally protected rights of wokring people, rights under attack in the USA.

Facts, not fairy tales. You need to try something better than a one liner to rebut my analysis




h_stigletz wrote:
And you think Obamacare is the trick it has already proved to be very corrupt,I thought you leftist were intelligent
First of all, there's no such thing as Obamacare. That's simply a right wing buzz word.
As for the health care package that passed on Obama's watch, it is inadequate. Some American form of the universal health care other civilized naitons (e.g. Sweden, France, Germany) has is absolutely essential. Anything less is a betrayal.
Indeed, our system should be far better--maybe even more comprehensive than Sweden's--as we are far RICHER than they.
Of course, they're not wasting billions or trillions trying to police the world. And they've not been redistributing wealth UPWARD for the last thirty years from the have nots (or have less) to the haves.

If Obama thinks that his petty tinkering "reforms" will work while leaving corporate privilege intact, theh the is sorely deluded.



Dan7085 hours agoin reply to WhatManyPeopleThink
This is one of the most uninformed comments I have ever read here or anywhere else. There is no comparison to the level of vetting the President Obama has been subjected to. From family, to pastors, to place of birth, to college professors, to religion. Do you actually think anyone else in the history of national politics has had entire movements and organizations spring up concerning his place of birth? Or had his church and pastor scrutinized 24/7 for months during the campaign? If the President had a spouse that has advocated armed rebellion against the US the way Tod Palin's organization has and then went to speak to that same organization and praise them shortly after the way Sarah Palin did, he never would have made it through the vetting process. You are tragically uninformed and totally ignorant of easily verified facts!


FYI on an unrelated note:

FYI on an unrelated note: Sarah Stillman wrote an article "The Invisible Army," which details the slave-like treatment of third country national service workers employed by US military in Afghanistan.
If you can't access this link, google "The Invisible Army" for June 6, 2011 The New Yorker.


Paul H. 1 week agoin reply to No_Pale_Pilgrims
Had to repeat what u said, "For a site to be called BLACK PLANET why aren't you promoting black love and support for black owned businesses. Instead of idol topics such as this where any sane, self loving black woman and man would see right thru this!"

u are absolutely right

Paul H. 1 week agoin reply to cocoa09
I agree, it is shameful that after all our people have been through that we are pretending that race doesn't matter

We better wake up and see what is happening
cocoa096 days agoin reply to Paul H.
To pretend that race doesn't matter is an absurd proposition for Black people. It shouldn't even be necessary to remind everyone that white people introduced the world to the concept of racial superiority. Race has been the European's primary preoccupation since the 1500's. In America, whites have benefitted economically from the ideology of white supremacy and the practice of racism since 1619. It's absurd to believe that they will ever abandon white supremacy. It's here to stay. (Note by Me: I do believe white supremacy can be defeated)

oh _ ReaIIy ___ wrote:
Yeah, of getting oppressed by people they claim their skin color makes them "superior"!
You mean black people overcoming obstacles, fighting for liberty, and believing in justice makes us blacks inferior to no one. It makes black people just as human as anyone else. Also, having beautiful dark skin color is great and is a blessing from God. We don't bow to the market like you do. We don't bow to the Tea Party like you people do.

-By Timothy


Zaius wrote:

"Real" African culture is brutal tribal warfare, polygamy, cannibalism, black magic voodoo, slavery, rape and outright murder.
All of this is historical fact and can still be observed in most of the global population of black Africans.
I have to admit it is impressive that you lot have been able to recreate so much of your traditional culture inside the worlds foremost first world nation after 400 years of western training on how to live like humans. The existence of your black slums all about the USA proves that white people are rather compassionate.
All of those actions that you mentioned have been done by people in the 4 corners of the Earth, even have by some of your relatives thousands of years ago. These acts are man-made errors done by every culture throughout history. It isn't limited to one ethnic group or race regardless of what you say. Like I've mentioned, true, traditional African culture deals with unity, balance, love of family, the essence of growing community, collective concern for black people, and the respect for the great legacy of our ancestors.

That is a historical fact. Many Africans then and now reject those evil acts. You just use these acts done by some people in Africa as an excuse to promote the coarse lie of black inferiority. It's as simple as that and you know this. Most black Africans don't support nihilism and outright murder, etc. That's a slander. If that's the case, there would be little of the black population existing presently. Black people have a great legacy from Kush, the universities of Timbuktu, and to the accomplishments of black people globally now in 2011. Yet, we know which people used unjust oppression against people of color for centuries (including others like the Holocaust) and tried to use religion to justify these deeds(and they still justify it today).

Also, we blacks acted like humans before you were born and before the empires of Rome & Greece. You just have this hatred of black people since you have a reactionary agenda. You want black individuals to follow you since you want blacks to be subservient to you like a Tom. Frankily, we blacks reject your pro-Tea Party Klan ideology and your bigoted attitude about people that look like me. Slums exist globally (just like in the mostly white trailer parks in poor sections of America. More of your people are in welfare in America than our people) and there are tons of black people making great contributions in the world via art, history, teaching, athletics, legal affairs, business, politics, manufacturing, science, mathematics, computer science, and a wide spectrum of occupations or jobs.

Blacks have a strong legacy.

-By Timothy (Me)


You're talking about BM/BW marriages I thought we were talking about interracial?

This is what is to be found, no matter who white women marry they always have a high divorce rate, with BW when they marry other races of men they have a lower divorce rate, I mean lower then even WW/WM here is something for you-

Statistics show that Black men/white women have a higher divorce rate than white men/black women – why is that?

I’ve seen these stories in various forums about the rate of divorce for inter-racial couples, and of course, the black/white dichotomies are much more explosive and interesting and salacious than other racial groups for some perverse reason.

But it is worth a post since it is an interesting question: why would there be a difference in the rate of divorce between interracial black/white couples when the genders are switched. That is, when the man is white and the woman is black, the divorce rate appears to be significantly lower. When the man is black and th

Another good one for you--A 2008 marital stability study by Jenifer L. Bratter and Rosalind B. King examined whether crossing racial boundaries increases the risk of divorce.[30] Using the 2002 National Survey of Family Growth (Cycle VI), the likelihood of divorce for interracial couples to that of same-race couples was compared.[30] Comparisons across marriage cohorts revealed that, overall, interracial couples have higher rates of divorce, particularly for those that married during the late-1980s.[30] The authors found race and gender variations; White female-Black male and White female-Asian male marriages are more prone to divorce than White-White pairings.[30] Conversely, unions between White males and non-White females (and between Hispanics and non-Hispanic persons) have similar or lower risks of divorce than White-White marriages.[3

Another one for you----------Are media portrayals of the black relationship dilemma accurate?

For example, we examine ABC News, Nightline feature article, "Single, Black, Female -- and Plenty of Company." Taking this statement literally, we should understand that single white women have more "company" than single black women. In the US, 6.2 million black women have never been married, compared to 16.6 million white women. Therefore, a single white female has 10 million more counterparts with whom to enjoy single life than black women.

However, as the article points out, sometimes numbers are deceiving. After all, as they claim, "Forty-two percent of U.S. black women have never been married, double the number of white women who've never tied the knot." True, with our independent analysis of the ACS, we find that 43 percent of black women have never been married compared to 20 percent of white women, who are 18 years and older. However, when analyzing the black women who are 35 and older, the percent who have never been married drops to 25 percent, indicating that a solid majority of black women get married before they turn 35. Granted, the total percent of unmarried black women is still twice more than for white women who are 35 and older.



emperorjohn wrote:
o all blacks who are conservatives must hate being black? I mean I was a black conservative once, but I did not hate my people.
I don't know whether all black conservatives hate their own people, though statments by SOME clearly suggest that.
But I'm reasonably sure that the kind of blacks supported by racists like Zaius are, as I suggested, those most likely to be contemptuous of other black people.
White supremacists don't support Blacks who love their people, and fight for the liberation of their people. Nor would I expect them to.

However, none of this changes my view--amply supported by King's words and works of King scholars--that Dr. Martin Luther King was a PROGRESSIVE, and even (as his own words show) a "democrtic socialist." Anyone can pick out conservative words here or there (often extracted from original context), but that doesn't change the fact that his basic orientation as early as the NINETEEN FIFTIES was progressive.
Again, people should look at the July 18, 1952 letter to Coretta Scott. Or in Volume 1 of THE PAPERS OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR, the 1951 diary entry called "Notes on American Capitalism." And King becomes MORE left of center as time goes on.
A good historical account of this which I mean to reread when I've the time is, FROM CIVIL RIGHTS TO HUMAN RIGHTS: MARTIN LUTHERK KING, JR. AND THE STRUGGLE FOR ECONOMIC JUSTICE.
And as for affirmativ action, probably the earliest reference to such (maybe even to the phrase iteelf) I found in a chapter of WHY WE CAN'T WAIT (1964) by Dr. King---along with his famous "Letter from a Birmingham Jail."
Now the question is: Why did Black "leaders" abandon or water down King's quest for economic justice? Lack of understanding? Myopia? Narrow class interests?


Note by Me: I don't believe that every black conservative is some sellout. I disagree with Savant on that issues and everything else I agree with him.

By Timothy


Gina21 wrote:
this is one sister that think like me.

-bourobou prince



*throw back* lol

-Gina21  (A Sister from Chicago)

“It’s just funny to me that people get more riled up and more excited and more angry about what I may or may not say about the president than they do about the crisis in black boys. If Negroes could get half as mad at what black boys are enduring as they do when Cornel West or Tavis Smiley says something, we might get something done.”

-Tavis Smiley



Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Hmmmm, plenty of food for thought, including that link to Black Love is a Revolutionary Act. Fascinating perspectives, not commonly portrayed in the multi-culti liberal 'we love black folk' media.

Andrea Muhrrteyn said...

Copy of Comment:

Hi Cree,

Fascinating perspectives. Found your blogpost via my friend Timothy's blog.

I notice you use the term white supremacy/racism allot. I do not disagree that 'racism' exists, but from my experience very few provide their definition for the term. Racism being an abstract concept of course has many meanings, unlike concrete terms which are concrete.

In order for me to better understand YOUR definition of racism, which may be totally different to mine, and many others, as may be your definition for 'democracy' or 'feminism' or 'justice' etc; all of which are abstract concepts.

My personal definition for 'racism' is that of Dr. Gedaliah Braun, from his book: Racism, Guilt, Self-Hatred and Self-Deceit.

Namely that facts which are true cannot be 'racist'; only inaccurate opinions can in fact be racist. For example; it is true that Serena Williams is superior to me at tennis, and it may also be true that I am superior to Serena Williams at legal research.

Cultures are superior to other cultures at specific tasks, from playing ping pong, to basketball, to inventions, etc. Stating a fact about one culture's superiour skills at that particular task (of course that does not mean all the people in that culture are superior,only that a bell curve of individuals are) is not racist, if in fact it is a FACT; i.e. TRUE, based upon impartial evidence.

Dr. Braun's definition of racism in effect says, that racism exists in the mind of the individual who refuses to hear new information and evidence, which may prove his/her racial biased views on any particular matter to be incorrect.

Racism is in effect, not what you believe, but how you hold those beliefs in your mind. How you refuse to engage people who may provide you with contrary evidence to your belief; becuase you refuse to consider all evidence to the contrary.


Secondly, I was fascinated by many perspectives in this blog post, which I imagine you would agree the multiculti (we pretend we love black folk liberal white) media certainly are not sharing on thier airwaves.

I found this statement particularly revealing: "Nevertheless, Umoja and I agree that the single most important thing that black people must do to counter the global SYSTEM of racism (white supremacy) is stay very, very far away from the genitals of all white people."

I am curious about how and why black folks who would like to 'counter racism' or 'white supremacy' don't enter into coalitions with white folks, and native americans and others who are active in support of ethno-cultural seccession and self determination.

Racial preference for your own is -- in my opinion -- totally natural. The multi-cultis may and will continue to attempt to force everyone to miscegenate, and to divide and conquer. Do you know of black folks who would like to support black secession and a black nation state, with black cultural values?

Why not enter into discussions with white, native american and other secessionists; to create an international coalition of ethno-cultural groups who support secesion and self-determination for their ethno-cultural groups.

In short, where all ethno-cultures stay very, very far away from the genitals of other ethno-cultural groups!

Timothy said...

I don't agree with you many issues. So, I am not in league with your agenda at all.