The Problem with Black Lives Matter

The real problem is people seeing things through these collective identities. Black, white, whichever, they're not who we are as beings. We're deeper than what's on this surface level we call the world.

We're individual sentient beings first. Equal in composition, even if not in development. We all have the equal right to self, to what belongs to self, what you freely align to self, and to preserve those things, and others, including self. It's not just an idea. It's a deep part of our nature. Part of who we are..

We keep attacking each other as tribes instead of respecting each other as individuals. I believe majority of the world's problems would be solved if we could just do that. The rest will when law upholds that respect. I believe The Force wills us to uphold the respect for life. Natural, supernatural, and sentient life.. and to twist it, wound it, consume it, for our own will is the practice of dark arts.

White supremacy, and any other form of supremacy, cannot exist without a system of supremacy. Where those in power nearly have, if not completely, direct control of people and their actions.

It's the reason why we even have a drug war that supports the prison-industrial-complex. When, as I said, you have a right to self. Including what you take into yourself. That's one part of the problem..

Racism is a moral issue that can't be dealt with using force. Systematic oppression, of the less influential, is an issue that can be done with easily.

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: The real problem is people seeing things through these collective identities. Black, white, whichever, they're not who we are as beings. We're deeper than what's on this surface level we call the world.

We're individual sentient beings first. Equal in composition, even if not in development. We all have the equal right to self, to what belongs to self, what you freely align to self, and to preserve those things, and others, including self. It's not just an idea. It's a deep part of our nature. Part of who we are..

We keep attacking each other as tribes instead of respecting each other as individuals. I believe majority of the world's problems would be solved if we could just do that. The rest will when law upholds that respect. I believe The Force wills us to uphold the respect for life. Natural, supernatural, and sentient life.. and to twist it, wound it, consume it, for our own will is the practice of dark arts.

I have to respectfully disagree. I think seeing the individual without respect for collective is essentially the same as missing the forest for the trees.

The relationship one has to one's family, for instance, is similar to every organism's relation to those members of their species who aid in their survival.

And indeed... my offspring are also part of myself that I leave in the world even after I'm gone.

The connection to the whole is the proof that we are more than just the sum of our individual parts.

Humanity must see humanity, not just humans.

The problem is that we've lost our greater identity because of individualism. Every organism increases its power when part of a group. Individual cells are meaningless without identifying with organs. It is in relationship to the collective that we derive roles and responsibilities.

White people should be proud of their collective accomplishments. Black people should be proud of theirs. But when we come together we should be proud of white accomplishments and black accomplishments. We should help each other, strengthen each other, mourn the loss of each other, love each other. It took a lot for me to get here. People died so I could get here. Black people and white people sacrificed so that we could be here together. We should not throw that away. It's not about stripping something away from ourselves we don't think is good or working. It's about learning to accept all of ourselves.

If someone desires to be superior over another group they can also feel superior over other individuals and already do. And if they working for supremacy as a group then no way would they simply give up that group that gives them an advantage. Things are always easy if people would simply do what we want them to do. But they won't because they're acting in their own self-interest, not the interest of other individuals or the communities they belong to. Cells that act in their own self-interest without regard to the collective body of which they are residents are, by definition, cancer.

I'm proud to be black because being black isn't easy. I'm simply also proud to be an American (I wasn't always). I'm proud to be a man. And more than that I am proud to be human. We must embrace all levels of our existence because they (being environmental constructs) all relate back to who you are: strengths, weaknesses, benefits, liabilities, advantages, challenges, and all experiences in between. If a person cannot respect the fact that I am black (blackness is a man-made concept but so is 'animal' and 'person') then they cannot accept me as an individual, be they white, black, or other.

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: White supremacy, and any other form of supremacy, cannot exist without a system of supremacy. Where those in power nearly have, if not completely, direct control of people and their actions.

It's the reason why we even have a drug war that supports the prison-industrial-complex. When, as I said, you have a right to self. Including what you take into yourself. That's one part of the problem..

Racism is a moral issue that can't be dealt with using force. Systematic oppression, of the less influential, is an issue that can be done with easily.

Systems are created to increase efficiency and power. They tend to grow over time. The problem is the system in question is a governing system. If it were outside the government I would suggest a competing system. Because the systems of government are co opted by those seeking power and because "some" of those seeking power are racist, parts of the system are "hacked", if you will, and those parts become racist. After all, if a hacker compromises your computer with a virus your computer will behave in a manner the virus dictates. Even other systems within your operating system end up serving the virus if they were designed to serve the parts of the system infected.

This is what makes racism systemic/systematic.

When black people say "white people", it depends on the context. If the context is racism then what we're saying is that white people are like a computer that has been infiltrated and taken over by racist hackers to the extent that vital parts of the system represent and serve their interests. But their computer doesn't have anti-virus software. It can't simply delete the virus, which is in very deep, but it can create rules that all programs, infected and non-infected, have to go through to detect the virus whenever the rules are broken. Once you detect the virus you must quarantine the virus and restrict its access.

What BLM was attempting to do is point and say "the virus is here! the virus is right over here!"

But instead of attacking the virus the system attacks the programs being affected by the virus. It attacks them for identifying the virus and urging a response from the entire system. In what possible scenario would I ignore the virus as the cause of the attack on the programs? Modern viruses protect themselves and adapt to removal methods. What we're dealing with is "Social Hacking" (a legitimate form of hacking). and credibility is like currency. If the virus can take away your credibility then you become powerless to stop it. Only the virus would want to take away your ability to stop it. ONLY THE VIRUS. And if the computer isn't attacking the virus it is because it is being operated and influenced by the virus.

All you can do to a virus is to try to outsmart the virus, recognize what it is, clean infected files and inoculate clean files. If there are thousands or millions of files, so be it. Because the only other solution is reinstall your operating system and possibly delete every file that could reinfect it. Cleaning those files is hard because while you think the virus is done, the virus is always working. The virus is always using the system to infect more files.

As long as it serves a purpose the virus will remain under the control of those who benefit from the virus.

ZealotX wrote:

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: The real problem is people seeing things through these collective identities. Black, white, whichever, they're not who we are as beings. We're deeper than what's on this surface level we call the world.

We're individual sentient beings first. Equal in composition, even if not in development. We all have the equal right to self, to what belongs to self, what you freely align to self, and to preserve those things, and others, including self. It's not just an idea. It's a deep part of our nature. Part of who we are..

We keep attacking each other as tribes instead of respecting each other as individuals. I believe majority of the world's problems would be solved if we could just do that. The rest will when law upholds that respect. I believe The Force wills us to uphold the respect for life. Natural, supernatural, and sentient life.. and to twist it, wound it, consume it, for our own will is the practice of dark arts.

I have to respectfully disagree. I think seeing the individual without respect for collective is essentially the same as missing the forest for the trees.

The relationship one has to one's family, for instance, is similar to every organism's relation to those members of their species who aid in their survival.

And indeed... my offspring are also part of myself that I leave in the world even after I'm gone.

The connection to the whole is the proof that we are more than just the sum of our individual parts.

Humanity must see humanity, not just humans.

The problem is that we've lost our greater identity because of individualism. Every organism increases its power when part of a group. Individual cells are meaningless without identifying with organs. It is in relationship to the collective that we derive roles and responsibilities.

White people should be proud of their collective accomplishments. Black people should be proud of theirs. But when we come together we should be proud of white accomplishments and black accomplishments. We should help each other, strengthen each other, mourn the loss of each other, love each other. It took a lot for me to get here. People died so I could get here. Black people and white people sacrificed so that we could be here together. We should not throw that away. It's not about stripping something away from ourselves we don't think is good or working. It's about learning to accept all of ourselves.

If someone desires to be superior over another group they can also feel superior over other individuals and already do. And if they working for supremacy as a group then no way would they simply give up that group that gives them an advantage. Things are always easy if people would simply do what we want them to do. But they won't because they're acting in their own self-interest, not the interest of other individuals or the communities they belong to. Cells that act in their own self-interest without regard to the collective body of which they are residents are, by definition, cancer.

I'm proud to be black because being black isn't easy. I'm simply also proud to be an American (I wasn't always). I'm proud to be a man. And more than that I am proud to be human. We must embrace all levels of our existence because they (being environmental constructs) all relate back to who you are: strengths, weaknesses, benefits, liabilities, advantages, challenges, and all experiences in between. If a person cannot respect the fact that I am black (blackness is a man-made concept but so is 'animal' and 'person') then they cannot accept me as an individual, be they white, black, or other.

You can't miss the uniqueness of the trees for the vastness of the forest. These connections are good for growth. However, it's the inner person that makes the man. It's the reason two siblings from the same home can become totally different people.. These temporal conditions aren't what makes us. They're tools for growth. An accumulation of the experiences of these conditions, and the choices made by them, constitute the character of the soul. Each one being as unique as a snowflake.. and we can't forget to be able to distinguish ourselves from others or run the risk of a mob-like mentality. The is the beauty of our level in creation. It's a delicate balance. Cooperative Individualism is part of it.

This purely collective, tribal way of addressing our problems is causing more harm than good because of the anger and hate being projected into it..

How can we learn to respect each other's tribe when we can barely do so as individuals?.. Look at Colin is being treated. Folks can't respect his personal right of speech and protesters. Much less the issue he wanted to bring attention to..

Jaedon Adar-Barnaby wrote: You can't miss the uniqueness of the trees for the vastness of the forest. These connections are good for growth. However, it's the inner person that makes the man. It's the reason two siblings from the same home can become totally different people.. These temporal conditions aren't what makes us. They're tools for growth. An accumulation of the experiences of these conditions, and the choices made by them, constitute the character of the soul. Each one being as unique as a snowflake.. and we can't forget to be able to distinguish ourselves from others or run the risk of a mob-like mentality. The is the beauty of our level in creation. It's a delicate balance. Cooperative Individualism is part of it.

I agree. But snowflakes are different because the conditions that make them are different. I don't believe in strictly 'nature or nurture'. I believe in 'nature AND nurture'. My sister and I are different because our experiences in life go beyond the parenting we both received. And even that was different because I was their second child. They had the benefit of more experience. My sister and I also had different experiences being opposite genders. We went to different schools, had different friends. And yet, by nature, we have similarities that other kids from other parents may have only by coincidence. Race, religion, and culture were all factors. ALL these things add up to unique individuals. ALL these things should be accepted if someone claims to accept you.

In the Brown Eyes Blue Eyes experiment Jane Elliott proved that treating a group a certain way would create the behavior commonly associated with black people as an oppressed minority. She transferred the same treatment to people with blue eyes as opposed to brown skin. One could argue the ethics of this, but the results were telling.

The things that we've gone through help build us. Our reaction to the opposition, the tactics we use to navigate racism and discrimination, the humility we have to endure to survive encounters with the police. It seems like it would be easier if we were all the same color. But the truth is that people would then find some other difference to use because racism itself is a strategy of supremacy. It doesn't simply exist to exist or because people thought it was a good idea. It exists because it serves a purpose. It acts a shield between the rich and the poor.

Like most things in a capitalistic society, racism has always been about money. Not only were slaves an economic commodity, but also, poor blacks were blamed for whites having fewer jobs and opportunities. With freed slaves suddenly competing for paying jobs... it was musical chairs and someone had to lose out. The love of money is called the root of all evil because it is corrupting. You were right when you said racism was a moral issue. But as long as it is also a tool it cannot die from moral arguments.

Not really that important to the discussion but this is what i meant about Cosby:

http://www.cnn.com/2015/07/07/us/bill-cosby-quaaludes-sexual-assault-allegations/index.html

Coke (and today, meth) makes people horny... qualudes make people sleepy, and eventually unconscious. If he had admitted to buying a bunch of coke in order to have sex with women, that would be different.
But fair enough, I don't really know. I read as much as was available at the time that i cared to read about it and drew the conclusion that made sense based on what i read. I'm not Bill Cosby or any of the women, and i wasn't in the jury or any part of the proceedings. Again, its not really important to this discussion, unless maybe you don't believe I would judge a white guy by the same standards. Which i say that I would.

ZealotX wrote:
I'd like to offer you this correction, in love. Or at least that is my intent.

http://dailycaller.com/2017/09/20/ohio-state-workshop-tells-students-only-whites-can-be-racists/

I read this article.

The title of the article is "Ohio State Workshop Tells Students Only Whites Can Be Racists"

So was this "rhetoric" aimed at hyping up black people to protest? No, it was a lecture to 20 people; 19 of which were white students.

When I was writing that post, somehow I hit the "submit" button long before I was done writing. So an unfinished (and not entirely coherent) post was submitted into public view, and with a short window for editing, I had to slap together some links without really looking that closely at them. I have been posting here for years on this topic. Ive submitted links before and besides that, i am VERY familiar with the issue and I know quite well that what I said about how "racism" has been deformed into "whiteness" was accurate, whatever the content of that specific link may have been.


And therein is the first of the obstacles that will keep us divided, because I will not join a side when its basic premise is predicated on my personal guilt for things that happened before i was even born, or the idea that i am to be held to a different set of standards because of my skin color. I am guilty only of the consequences my own choices and I do not accept the guilt of anyone else as my own. I will not cooperate with a social movement that seeks to impinge me for someone else's behavior and I will hold all parties to the same set of standards. These will be recurring themes of our discussions lol.

ZealotX wrote: Racism is a very charged word that is confused with racial prejudice and discrimination. Whether the confusion is engineered, I cannot say. I will say it seems rather convenient to me though.

Racism has meant the same thing for decades. There is a modern, SJW version, where racism is specifically white supremacy, and only white people can be guilty of it. THATS the "socially engineered" version of racism, and embracing it as valid is not going to reduce the amount of real racism in the world.

ZealotX wrote: So what is racism?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qi9imppcCUc

Racism is a competitive relationship that is power based.

There isn't a functional definition of racism offered either in your words nor in that ridiculous video, unless you mean "race" in the sense of a race-track, where we compete in and field events... like we are all racing against each other to get to the finish line.

The closest thing to a definition was this: "Racism is a competitive relationship between groups of people that are competing for the ownership and control of wealth and resources".

Point 1:
LOL, Thank you Karl Marx, for that is Marxism exactly. The idea of civilization as a battleground (of wealth and resources) between the proletariat and the bourgeois. Its literally just B.S. Marxist theory overlaid to western capitalism generally and American politics specifically. Except now you (general "you" meaning the radical leftists) want to identify the bourgeois as the straight white male, and everyone else as the proletariat. That playbook made communist nations a hell-hole for hundreds of millions of people, and it would do the same to USA if it is allowed to. But it wont be, because, ME, lol.

Point 2:
Arent realtors and stockholders "groups of people competing for the ownership of wealth and resources"? In fact, arent you and i? The job market itself is a competition, and so is housing. So is shopping for groceries or clothes, for that matter. We are involved in all of those markets, competing with each other for the ownership of wealth and resources.

Point3:
The dude in the video is not EXACTLY wrong, but from my understanding, hes not right either.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholic_Church_and_slavery#Slavery_incorporated_into_canon_law

If you care to find a copy of the original papal decree then we can look at that. Otherwise, I'm calling it "revisionist B.S.'
If you want to use the formula "racism = racial prejudice + social power" then that would be ok with me. But i predict that isn't going to be allowed for much longer because it doesnt work to the ambitions of the Marxists who want us to battle each other with group vs group identity politics. It doesn't work because there are too many examples of non-whites in positions of wealth, influence, and power.

I'm going to let you in on a secret: white people don't actually have some grand white brotherhood of conquest, dominance, and exclusion. Believe it or not, Dick Cheney doesn't give any more of a fk about me than he does about you. He is certainly a part of a large number of powerful groups, but whiteness is not the defining criteria for membership in those groups. Wealth, yeah. Ownership of multi-national companies, claims to big energy and infrastructure building. Ties to the intelligence community. Membership at a number of prestigious golf clubs, even.
Now admittedly, being white was a prerequisite during a particular time in history (and in some cases it is still and in some cases it may still be quite a challenge to break through into certain groups if one isn't white) but America has got non-white people who have risen to positions of great wealth, authority, and influence. And the groups which hold the most power are not in fact predicated on race, but rather on economic and political significance.

ZealotX wrote: Racism doesn't mean that you think your race is the "master race". It really just means that you are part of a system, conscious or unconscious, that collectively maintains "white supremacy".

By this "definition" (which isn't a definition, though it seems to have been accepted as one), everyone who pays taxes is a racist. Everyone who holds a job or votes, or basically isn't a communist revolutionary plotting a civil war and the displacement of the entire USA government is racist.

ZealotX wrote: No one person built America. And it's hard when Americans, as individuals, have to face the hatred for some of the things our government has done in our name. However, as an American, it's a difficult argument for me to attempt, to separate myself from democratically elected officials making decisions that in their minds represent their constituents. If I was taken hostage by Isis, I don't know what I'd say. I could say I disagree with the murder of innocent Muslims, especially women and children. But I cannot deny my status as an American citizen and that my tax dollars helped pay for that.

If daesh kidnapped and murdered you, it wouldn't be because you deserved to be kidnapped and murdered, it would be because daesh are kidnapping, murdering, raping, pillaging bastards. Kidnapping and murdering people is what they do.

ZealotX wrote: I personally feel like it's not fair because I am in the majority, to take responsibility for the collective will of the majority but it's my responsibility to influence the views of the majority and if I fail to do that I'm still responsible for what my nation does.

Its your responsibility to decide where your responsibility begins and ends. If you think that youre responsible for the Iraq invasion (which I'm using as a place holder for all of usa interactions with muslim countries) then that's your choice to feel that way. I used my voice as well as i was able at the time, but the tides were against me. I voted the way i voted, but my vote didn't win. I did what i could do, the rest of the world did what it did. I accept responsibility for my actions because i am responsible for my actions. Other people took other actions, and those people are responsible for their actions.

ZealotX wrote: I don't personally feel it's fair to say whites are racist. I don't agree with that wording, wherever you may have heard it. However, I know that the term is being used in order to confer legitimate responsibility to all the members of the white race for all the things that the white race has collectively done.

If I'm responsible for "all the things that the white race has collectively done" then doesnt that mean i am also responsible for electricity? The abolition of slavery? Industry? Modern infrastructure? Democracy? Airplanes? The internet?
Arent i responsible for the building of Western civilization in general? Dont i also deserve personal credit for all the good things that white people have done and produced over the years? Or am i only to be given the blame for their mistakes and crimes?

Whatever your opinion may be, I accept neither the credit nor the blame.\.
The only part that i have to play in this game is what i do with my own life. I was born into the context of this era, what i do within that context is my responsibility but the context itself is not.



The current state of research basically says that implicit bias testing can produce MORE bias in people who are forced to take the training, but that it can also be useful for reducing bias in people who volunteer to take it.

Its also not exactly proven that it measures racism, so much as "novelty response" which is quite different from racism. I'm not really wanting to say that the idea of testing has absolutely no place. My real issue with it is more about everyday people thinking they "sense" the unconscious bias of their peers. I cannot stand paranoid black people who "just know" that all the white people aroudn them are racists because... whatever.

Ive spent a lot of time with a lot of black people. I lived in black neighborhoods as a child, went to primary, middle, and high schools with large black populations. Ive been to jail and had to live and cell-mate with black people. Ive returned to school in my adulthood and am currently a student at a community college, and many of my peers nd some of my professors are black: growing up, my best friends (and worst enemies) were often black. My jiujitsu coach (one of the most important people in my life) is black. Ive crushed on black girls and ive worked with AND FOR black people in many of the jobs that ive had over the years.

I have known MANY black people, and a not-insignificant number of them have stereotyped me, assuming that i judge them harshly because they are black. I dont decide a persons merit based on their skin: I judge people by how they carry themselves and the ideas they express. If your ideas are ignorant and juvenile then i wont like you, whatever color you are. If your bearing is one of integrity and personal responsibility, then i will like you (or at least respect you) whatever color you are.

Ive seen a lot of black people assuming racism where there wasnt any, and this idea of unconscious bias just adds to that. I dislike it because it makes it easy for people to decide racism exists without any real proof. When you cant find any actual, objective evidence for racism, you can ALWAYS pull the "unconscious bias" card to inject racism even when there isn't any, AND MANY PEOPLE DO JUST THAT. That's what i really dislike about it.

ZealotX wrote: The human brain works based on association. As a programmer it is impossible to convince me that we are not programmed by our experiences. There's no reason for children to have racist attitudes (and in this case the definition of racism is not the same as the one taught at Ohio State or the one in the Dr. Claude Anderson video I shared) except that they learn them from their parents and friends. It is inherited and passed on because whites wont stop reacting to what they see black people doing without applying what they see to an entire race.

So, we agree that you cannot hold one person responsible for the actions of some other, completely unrelated person, simply because they have the same skin color? If we can agree on that then it will go a long way towards us reaching an accord. If not, well that's life. We dont always agree with each other.

ZealotX wrote: On the other hand, most of my fiance's son's exposure (who has lived with me for the past 2 years now) has unfortunately been the result of personal experiences. He gets into arguments with other kids and suddenly he's whatever slur they've heard and he reacts by using whatever he's heard.

We all have personal experiences. I can give you some pretty unhappy experiences from my own life (especially my childhood) but i wont. I will repeat the importance of personal responsibility. We all get treated unfairly in life. You might think its worse for you because youre black. This other person thinks its worse for him because he is gay. That one thinks its worse for her because shes a woman. Another thinks its worse for her because she is ugly and not very smart. Another says he is fat and socially inadequate. Yet another is dirt poor and another is scrawny and afraid of everyone. We all feel persecuted. And really, we all ARE persecuted at certain moments in our lives. Yet, virtually all of us end up with the lives that we built through our personal decisions, in spite of our persecutions.

ZealotX wrote: But there is no BLM rhetoric that all white people are racists....

I'm not saying the idea is specific to BLM, I'm saying it is a general refrain of the psycho, communist, infiltrated, modern left. Which in no way should be taken to suggest that i deny the psycho crazies on the right, there are many. I'm against crazy people being in charge no matter what their political affiliations are.
Which makes me a true minority in this mad house of an era lol
My point is only that if we really want to build a society of justice and fairness then we have to reject ALL racist ideas.

ZealotX wrote: ....in ANY definition that expresses a thought that didn't already exist because of our interactions with whites.

I'm not sure what you actually meant when you said that but it comes across as "ive interacted with enough racist white people that I just know that pretty much all white people are racist".

ZealotX wrote: At the end of the day we're not going to solve this through various means of slander. We're going to solve it by taking responsibility for things that we don't necessarily want to see as being our problem.

That part, I agree with.

I will be back, eventually.

@OB1Shinobi

First, let me applaud you. You are a great person. I really do mean this. This is part of the reason I have enjoyed having this discussion here as opposed to YouTube because the quality of individual character tends to be higher, imho. Often the people who have the worst things to say are the ones who make sure, like the trolls they are, that we hear them. They criticize everything from how we look to our IQ. I would say a lot of racists enjoy trolling people when they can get away with it. And before the internet, they were basically still trolling us and adding to the perception that their feelings were widespread. I'm personally not saying they are. In the next 2 posts, if I don't respond to every point you made it is only because I agree with you. But it wouldn't be right if I didn't try to explain how many of us view racism as a "collective" action of white people without personally blaming you. It's not meant to be personal. It's not meant to say OB1Shinobi... you are a racist. Not at all. There are always exceptions to every rule and you are exceptional.

What we have experienced is by definition "(white) racism". Where we came from everyone was some shade of brown. My skin color is brown, not black. So even the term itself is an exaggeration meant to draw attention to my color being about as different as it can get. When we couldn't drink from white fountains... it was ALL white fountains, not some of them. And I know you weren't there and you're not guilty. I wasn't there either. But when we had Jim Crow laws against us and when we were trying to run to freedom in the North, we knew that it wasn't all whites who were cool with it. That's why we knew to go North. Because there we would find people like you. That doesn't mean that suddenly racism is asian racism or latino racism. It's still white racism. And we want white people do do something about it because they are the only ones who can. When we are treated a certain way because of our race it is only the "house negro" who tends to say "but masa aint like that. He cares about us negros" and then we tell that uneducated person to shut the hell up because masa still views him as his property and no one ever said it was every single individual white person that was guilty. How would children be guilty? So no, we have never meant it that way. It's more like... those innocent children might grow up to be racists so their parents have to be responsible for them. We came from villages where your kids were essentially everyone's kids. Every adult had some level of responsibility to protect each other and educate and protect each other's kids. We have since been shifting away from that into more of the American sense of individual responsibility, but we still have that sense of shared responsibility in our culture which I think is why we lean more towards the Democratic Party. So I think it is a cultural way of thinking, not necessarily that every individual of a group is the same (which is why Ben Carson exists). And I can understand the confusion and agree that it would be terrible if that's what was meant.

I am also aware of how smaller groups and organizations make themselves sound bigger than they are. I'm also keenly aware of how the worst individuals of a group can be made to represent that group. A lot of the stereotypes against black people are based on the same thing. When people use words like thugs and super predators... we know who they're talking to and who they're talking about. And we know the effect words can have on a minority that doesn't have political or economic power.

According to history, it was a small minority of whites who actually owned slaves. However, many black people are under the "impression" that it was widespread. Of course slave masters with large fields would have a large number of slaves so if everyone had slaves then the white population would have been severely outnumbered. But I want to talk about this to help us all understand how impressions and perceptions play a huge role in the continuity of racism and white supremacy.

As I said before, there was a time when poor blacks and poor whites were working together and the rich whites were the minority however their wealth gave them power. Instead of losing their power to the majority the divided them. They gave land and jobs to poor whites on the basis of race. And even though those poor whites never owned a slave a day in their lives they protected the rich whites and helped them keep black people in a weaker position and even helped them by fighting for their right to keep slaves. And so even today, poor whites are taught to blame black people whenever they can't get jobs or opportunities that they were used to getting from the wealthy whites because they got it before on the basis of race.

It would be most accurate to blame the rich whites who basically used racism as a tool to enlist poor whites to help them maintain their power and economic supremacy, but this is basically where white supremacy comes from. It comes from whites who aren't wealthy, helping the wealthy whites stay on top because they believe they will create jobs (for them) and this is echoed by conservative talking points. If you want to say that the far right, I won't argue. But that's how I see it. And generally, the black community has suffered a number of events beyond slavery and jim crow, where we have seen the hate of the non-elite, non-wealthy, and even the non-educated, whites, create even more issues for us than the wealthy whites. It seems to me that the lower class whites were the group that was in competition with blacks. Therefore they were the ones who compared themselves to black people, who judged black people the harshest, who treated all black people as a monolith, and who ultimately didn't know black people because of how they tried to keep us segregated.

Now rich slave masters would have sex with black women all the time. But for the poor whites... the idea of a black man and a white woman was a perversion of nature and blasphemy. So there were mobs of whites that would burn down our towns. There has never been a black protest that has come close to the destruction of these mobs. And although a woman claiming rape was used as justification (even if it was a lie) it was jealousy and hate that motivated them. I think that probably most of the wealthy whites today are the LEAST racist because they never really had a reason to be. Like you said about Cheney, and you're right, he doesn't give a damn about either of us. Absolutely right. But POLITICALLY... he would never say that and republicans would never say that. Politics in general is a deceptive practice because the point isn't to let everyone know exactly what you think or feel but how you can manipulate people to think you're on their side even when you're NOT. That's how they steer the ship of a democracy even though they are in the minority.

What I'm suggesting to this forum is that the political effect of wealthy whites on poor whites helps to build up and maintain racism. The racial hatred mostly comes from poor whites. Those actually willing to do actual hate crimes tend to be uneducated as well. This wouldn't have affected you because of where you lived but in rural white communities and small towns with very few black people... yes, it has an effect. Think about how the KKK reacted to Donald Trump when he first condemned their actions vs. afterwards when he said there were some fine people among them and that both sides were to blame. They feel like he's with them. They feel like they have a voice in the white house. And when he says MAGA... they think MAWA. Now is Trump a racist? I think he is prejudiced and racially biased based on his past but I do not think he has any real connection with the alt-right, nazis, KKK, etc. I think he is using them just like he uses everyone else whose last name isn't Trump. There is a disconnect between the rich and the poor and the poor are largely seen as dependent on the rich. So instead of being disenfranchised by globalization and turning on their rich politicians... they blame black people. So this idea that "they took our jobs", what's that? This goes back to the definition of racism I shared before where it is about the control of resources for that particular racial group." It is un-American in ideology but essentially this is what the real racists believe. If they think blacks are inferior or whatever it is... hatred is not even necessary to racism because the bottom line is an "us vs them" mentality when it comes to SURVIVAL. And that has everything to do with control of the wealth and resources.

This is why white supremacy still exists; because it benefits white people in general. If you're playing basketball, if there's even one extra man on the court it is an unfair advantage. If one team is playing as a team and the other "team" is just a bunch of individuals trying to score for their own records, they'll lose because the team always has the advantage. Other groups that come to America also have a tendency to play as a team; especially because they see the disadvantage of not doing so. Even if you don't see it and there's no meetings, many whites do play as a team. And many of the ones who don't hire friends or family or school mates. These can have the appearance of being racist if those friends, family, school mates are all white because of where they grew up and went to school. Either way, if it wasn't for diversity hires I'd hate to see black unemployment numbers. And racism shouldn't be tolerated because it is against the ideals that the United States of America were founded on. And you have many whites who hold those ideals higher than race and higher than any desire to defend racism. And it is those whites who have evolved beyond the pettiness and who can save white people from this social virus.

I'd say I'm middle class but most black people are in the lower class. What kind of white people do they tend to come into contact with? Certainly not rich people who don't work at at any place they go to. We are already segregated by economics. Either we're dealing with the white people who grew up with us (like you) who are "cool" with us and vice versa or we're dealing with whites who see themselves in competition with us; not "one of us". So therefore, the perception many of us get, is that it (racism) is coming from all parts of the white community. It's coming from the top and the bottom. It's coming from the top because the top creates the systems and institutions and allows them to be run a certain way (in whatever way that will protect them and serve their agenda) and it comes from the bottom as the cogs in those systems and the instruments of that agenda.

Now if you look at whites in the middle... this is where a lot of the progressives are. They don't understand racism. They don't feel privy to racism. They're not generally in on the joke. They don't go to the same bars. They don't live in the same neighborhoods. They are segregated by class economics. So they are surprised to see overt racism in 2017. And they can't stand it. But... the black community simply cannot accept their blindness as an excuse. But the civil rights movement and other large protests are mainly an effort to get their attention as well as others who don't want to be part of this system of white supremacy. If black people simply thought ALL white people (on an individual level) were racist then what point would demonstrations serve? What point would marches and rallies have? Especially when white people and white clergy would march with us? And think about it like this... why were white people marching with us? Who did they hope would take notice? Who did they want to influence? I submit that they knew racism was a "white" problem.

We live in different strata of society. Within this there are different stereotypes that everyone knows isn't true for every individual. You've probably heard "white men can't jump", or "white people can't dance", etc. Silly stuff. But no one is thinking that there is not a single white person that has rhythm. That could be proven wrong all day by the number of white jazz musicians alone. And things, I think have gotten better, within the strata of America in which all races merge and share cultural aspects with each other. And yes, even if we might be able to trace it to Africa (like how everyone came from Africa), we associate martial arts with China and Japan. Yes, electricity is associated with Europeans just like black museums give credit to "black inventions". Now if you don't think of inventions as belonging to a racial group I think that's fantastic. But black people are more reactionary so it's because our history isn't taught in our public schools and I have personally had to defend my race against uneducated bigots who would tell me that black people never invented anything... things like that make us protective of our culture and contributions. But still, it is an emotional reaction to hate. That's why if we can solve the problem at its source then black people won't have to react to it, deflect it, or project it, and we'll then be able to get past racism.

The people in this conversation might be interested in this video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=43gm3CJePn0&t=4s