How is the South inherently 'racist'?

LOL!! You aren't getting anything else from me. This thread is ridiculous.

 

Take a course in logic kid. The title of the thread speaks for itself. Unless I misread it, the premise is that there is a thought in the OP's head that the south only is inherently racist.

 

What part do you not get? The south didnt go to war, the north brought the war to the south when the south didnt want to be part of the US anymore. The south didnt invade the north to keep slavery, they left the Union to protect their right to make laws to govern themselves.

 

You want to say that the south still suffers greatly from racism to this day. Well, show us why you think that. Show us some articles that magnify and spotlight the atmosphere of racism that you feel is so heavy set in the south from at least the last 10 years if you think it is the only place in America that is needing work.

 

If people want to point out the fact that a lot of African Americans hate the hell out white people in the South, then I absolutely agree and understand.
Considering that fact, and the fact that African Americans actually live in the South, I believe it would support the idea the South is inherently racist.

To assume that inherent racism is a white issue in the South just shows how people want to continue to use the issue to keep their voters in line.
It doesn't recognize that we don't hate them back just to fit the Yankee agenda that attempts to keep the South in line with their Plantation Mentality.
Keep pushing the issue, and think we don't see right through that Yankee crap ... not that it hasn't been effective.
It is an excellent example of what Northern Liberals think ... Not only about whites in the South, but about the African Americans too.

It isn't an argument about who is being spoon fed ... and more of an argument about who is holding the spoon.
If there are any African Americans that are still being duped ... You just need to remember that when they talked about "forty acres and mule" ... the forty acres weren't in Ohio, Massachusetts, or New York.

 

The hyperlibs endlessly bump this fiction about how today, fifty years after everything changed in this country about civil rights, the South remains for Blacks something as horrible as the Spanish Inquisition! That is why neither you, nor myself, can ever get a coherent, intelligent answer to questions like the one you posed. The fiction is an important part of their hyperliberal propaganda platform, and it's vital to keeping Reverse Discrimination against White people (a.k.a., "affirmative action") in force.

Did you notice how, after I put forward the issue of Reverse Discrimination, dujac and the other libs ignored it completely?! They blow on their party line incessantly, like a cheap penny-whistle -- shrill and loud, and refuse to enter into any dialogue.

 

LoL, ok guy. The south said "I'll be damned if you take away our right to keep the negro in slavery" but you want to argue about who may or may not have started the war....

That is very telling about your moral compass.

 

Because people tend to ignore asinine statements to a certain point, then it's, "damn. that's enough stupidity, I have to say something". You want to complain about "reverse discrimination"? Tell me something, with the way people complain about "obamacare" do you not think that there are some who "will die kicking and screaming" to oppose the passage of the civil rights act? You think that just because a law was passed, that people's mindset just changed overnight? But I guess there is nobody alive today from 1965, eh?

Let's talk about the plantation owners, what do you think they told their children when the law was passed that took away a invaluable asset they used to farm their land? Or the money they paid for the slave in the first place? What do you think the sharecropper who didn't have pot to (*)(*)(*)(*) in, told their children when it was ingrained that the "negro" is a, how did Texas put it....We hold as undeniable truths that the governments of the various States, and of the confederacy itself, were established exclusively by the white race, for themselves and their posterity; that the African race had no agency in their establishment; that they were rightfully held and regarded as an inferior and dependent race, and in that condition only could their existence in this country be rendered beneficial or tolerable.. You REALLY think that a law passed wiped away that type of thinking? Especially when you see that same thinking on this very forum in 2013?

What is sad is that, in 2013 I have to spend my time writing this stuff, not to educate you because your mind is closed, but to show other people reading this how some peoples thinking haven't changed a whole bunch since then. I mean, because according to you, we have laws and stuff, so that makes everything ok...../sarcasm

 

Well I don't know …

I think Pollcy did a pretty good job in identifying that your close-minded attempt to reinforce the Plantation Mentality was akin to blowing a penny whistle.

But hey … Keep Blowing … Nobody is stopping you, and we all know the tune (one of those classic oldies).

 

well, color me shocked.

 

Shocked ... ?
I was thinking more along the lines of yellow.

 

Well yes, it does. If there is anything worth saying about that, it would be that there has been some significant milestone toward the contrary that has been reached.

The South isn't the ONLY place where there is racism, but it is well known (sorry) that there are sizable expressions of the same, in the region of America.

I DO NOT WANT TO SAY anything negative; but about the Southern United States, I CAN say (within reason) that racism is a profound problem. Many not find that to be flattering, positive or pleasing, but it is (sadly) true. I and other Americans await the ERA where what I'm saying is MOSTLY wrong; it would be nice, likely something worth celebrating.

Even so, as a result of this thread... going forward, I'll keep an eye and an ear out... for statistics which might lead me to believe that the "South" is not as terrible (concerning RACISM) as most Americans know/believe it to be. If it IS truly getting better in the most significant of ways, then I have nothing against that.

 

Then if you say it is statistically racist, show some stats to back that up.

 

i took several classes in logic

your response ignores the pertinent descriptor: 'only'

he doesn't say that only the south is inherently racist

and i haven't seen where anyone in this thread said they think it is

 

One: Obamacare and CRA is apples to oranges.

Two: You seem to really think everyone that opposed it was in the south, and that in 50 years, no one moved in or out of the south nor had babies who grew up along side those people their parents hated for no reason. You dont think in 50+ years, those that hated the CRA havent died, or been bred out to make their numbers insignificant in the south. The majority of people that hated the CRA where already 25 y/o or older. It was the younger crowd that was marching WITH MLK jr. This thought you have that just because SOME racist at the age of 75 y/o are still alive still means racism is prevalant in the south is rediculous and the farthest from the truth.

The plantation owner didnt out number the nonplantation owns. You are putting a large emphisis on those people that cried the loudest even though they were NOT the majority.

And as we all know, the sentiments of the politicians are not always in line with the way the population feels. That might have been the politicians wording, but for the citizens, you cant say you know how they felt about it, and I highly doubt they ever saw that letter. How hard is it for us to see policies and bills on the internet before congress votes on them no a days. "We have to pass the bill to see whats in it".

You spend time writting this stuff to keep your hinges rusted shut and block out any new information from trickling in. Hopefully the future generations will see past this victim mentality you have and see that the past doesnt affect their future unless they let it.

 

It is not apples to oranges guy, "obamacare" is a law, just like the civil rights were a law. People complain "obamacare" was shoved down their throats, just like I can imagine people were upset about the civil rights law. Hell, in fact people were so upset about having slaves set free that they went to war over it. So, I'll be looking for your "equal outrage" in other threads next time a "black crime" thread is created.

LoL @ victim mentality.

 

I really wish there was a poll of how many people in the US supported/disapproved of the CRA back then.

Again, no war was started because of slaves being set free. The war was started because the north wanted to control the south for its cheap aggriculture that it provided to the industrial north. The south may have left the union partially for the fear that slavery would be abolished, but just like today, having a Liberal POTUS like Lincoln who hated blacks, didnt mean he was going to get his way in banning slavery nationally. Still needed congress to pass the ammendment and that wasnt going to happen any time soon. The south knew this, they left for other reasons as it has been explained before. And no shots were fired in the north till long after they invaded the south.

 

I'm trying to understand if you are serious with this paragraph. You think a child growing up with parents who lived during those times were not impressionable? One of the reasons racism is lower today than in the past is due to education. When kids go off to college, they leave their surroundings and interact with different cultures and people. You may have a case where a kid may have a bad image of black people due to his father's bias, then goes to college and you find out his best friend now is black. There are more kids in college in Mississippi now than ever before, and that is a good thing.

But it's a fools errand to think that only a handful of people had negative views of black people 50 years ago.

 

If there was, would you really want to see the results?

 

Checkmate

 

I find it hard to believe as you manufactured a defense using terminology that is either contrived or irrelevant. 'Descriptor' in this case would be racism. Establishing a parameter that includes only one region of the country shows either bias on the OP's part or the thread was designed to incite based on an historic fallacy. Obviously the latter has been achieved as the fact that there are over 800 posts in this thread prove. And there are many examples in this thread where posters nibble on the edges of offering that in fact the south is inherently racist yet they lack the intestinal fortitude to come out and say so explicitly. Now as an aside, take a few courses in how to use punctuation and your claim that you have taken courses in logic may have merit.

 

i knew you were just playing games

it's an illusion

what a load of malarkey

i can guarantee you that i'm much more well read, than you'll ever be

take a look at ee cummings

 

Handful? No. But I doubt the sentiment was 60% against like it was for Obamacare. Yes, racism is taught through the parents, just like any other family value. But I have to believe that people can change if they see a destructive value in their family. And it has been at least 2 generations since CRA was passed, you dont think people have become more accustomed to minorities living in their neighborhoods and going to school with their kids since then? Not to mention that many people that have moved into or out of the region in the past 50+ years havent brought their family values with them to replace the already dying sentiment of racism back then?

Yes, I really would like to know.

 

The load comes from your lips kid. I offered a response to your lame claim and the best you can do is hold your breath and shake your heads left-to-right.

So you read. Welcome to the club. But what do you read? Obviously nothing that would equip you in this debate. Bow out and cut your losses.

 

Most people KNOW though means far more intuitive than statistics, that the South is plagued with racism. I will strongly suggest and hold to the now reasonable position that the LEAST someone with your position must do, is present irrefutable statistics to support your assertion.

The South is infected with racism and that is common knowledge. Please, prove that to be wrong; it will be interesting.