This thread is a mess. My african parents came to America with a student visa and $100. I'm now in the last 5 years, meeting Africans of wealth who are in the states just because.
Tariq Nasheed vs Andrew Schulz on The Brilliant Idiots...VIDEO ADDED
- Thread starter ☑︎#VoteDemocrat
- Start date
AJaRuleStan
All Star
>equal resources for every group
I turned it off right when they started discussing this exact topic. Tariq Nasheed argument for what he needs to see in reality for him to conclude white supremacy doesn't exist is something that has never been witnessed on the face of this planet, even within communities/countries where the members belong to the same race. There has never been even representation of groups within the numerous fields of human endeavor, or an equal amount of wealth held among different groups, around the world, ever, in the entire history of mankind.
This is the fallacy with Tariq's entire thinking, he assumes that the default state of things when it comes to human actives would be evenness across the board as the natural outcome, and since that's not what he finds when he examines societies many institutions, he concludes that one group must be manipulating said activity in their favor. Thus, why he doesn't need to show any speck of evidence when he claims some black guy in X field is a token, because with his logic, absence of evenness or equality of outcomes is proof enough. But anybody with basic knowledge in world history knows what he assumes as the norm is actually an anomaly.
I turned it off right when they started discussing this exact topic. Tariq Nasheed argument for what he needs to see in reality for him to conclude white supremacy doesn't exist is something that has never been witnessed on the face of this planet, even within communities/countries where the members belong to the same race. There has never been even representation of groups within the numerous fields of human endeavor, or an equal amount of wealth held among different groups, around the world, ever, in the entire history of mankind.
This is the fallacy with Tariq's entire thinking, he assumes that the default state of things when it comes to human actives would be evenness across the board as the natural outcome, and since that's not what he finds when he examines societies many institutions, he concludes that one group must be manipulating said activity in their favor. Thus, why he doesn't need to show any speck of evidence when he claims some black guy in X field is a token, because with his logic, absence of evenness or equality of outcomes is proof enough. But anybody with basic knowledge in world history knows what he assumes as the norm is actually an anomaly.
Last edited:
UpAndComing
Veteran
Yeah I deff agree. It's obvious why Tariq has a successful radio show. He's very good at long form talk radio. He's the type of debater that needs time to express his points. He's not that great on those 6-8 min segments on Fox News. Cats like DL Hughley or Killer Mike is better at that. He plants a seed, and let's this several arguments evolve in the conversation
Cause in the beginning, first 25 minutes, it seemed like Tariq wasn't being clear on this points. Then as it wore on, he tactfully exposed every last one of Shulz's points and got him filibustering. Tariq basically let Shulz talk himself out, and step on his own toes, then he went for the kill. He did it masterfully
Obama:
He brought up three things on Obama:
1. He brought up Ready to Work: He was not funded specifically with Blacks in mind. It was done for middle America and for democratic bases like Washington D.C. so they can keep their political numbers in those districts. That said, it was one of the best things Obama did for Americans, not just Blacks.
2. I HATE Black people mentioning my brother keeper. This is that bullshyt. You had to be in 38 states or more to qualify. Who qualified, most white organizations. Who else, Boys and Girls Club which while it does good, it's not the ones who really help fund jobs and skills training for young Blacks. What they didn't mention was how Obama admin funded a lot of these gender specific programs like Girls can code and what not. It was genius, the issue was, they never did shyt for Black males. My brother's keeper was an wack job attempt. While I cannot directly blame Obama for this, I can say that the white supremacist has done an amazing job not giving shyt to Black males other than hell.
3. The Black AG's is a big deal but how it relates to the everything Black collective probably isn't but that said, I wouldn't call them tokens and yes, it was major.
4. Black employment could be tied to the national's employment. Maybe just maybe.
He brought up three things on Obama:
1. He brought up Ready to Work: He was not funded specifically with Blacks in mind. It was done for middle America and for democratic bases like Washington D.C. so they can keep their political numbers in those districts. That said, it was one of the best things Obama did for Americans, not just Blacks.
2. I HATE Black people mentioning my brother keeper. This is that bullshyt. You had to be in 38 states or more to qualify. Who qualified, most white organizations. Who else, Boys and Girls Club which while it does good, it's not the ones who really help fund jobs and skills training for young Blacks. What they didn't mention was how Obama admin funded a lot of these gender specific programs like Girls can code and what not. It was genius, the issue was, they never did shyt for Black males. My brother's keeper was an wack job attempt. While I cannot directly blame Obama for this, I can say that the white supremacist has done an amazing job not giving shyt to Black males other than hell.
3. The Black AG's is a big deal but how it relates to the everything Black collective probably isn't but that said, I wouldn't call them tokens and yes, it was major.
4. Black employment could be tied to the national's employment. Maybe just maybe.
Last edited:
I wouldn't even say those guys are good at it. To me, someone like Prof Truth or Khalid Muhammad are great in sound bite segments. shyt, they are good at both.Yeah I deff agree. It's obvious why Tariq has a successful radio show. He's very good at long form talk radio. He's the type of debater that needs time to express his points. He's not that great on those 6-8 min segments on Fox News. Cats like DL Hughley or Killer Mike is better at that. He plants a seed, and let's this several arguments evolve in the conversation
Cause in the beginning, first 25 minutes, it seemed like Tariq wasn't being clear on this points. Then as it wore on, he tactfully exposed every last one of Shulz's points and got him filibustering. Tariq basically let Shulz talk himself out, and step on his own toes, then he went for the kill. He did it masterfully
Son, wtf are you talking about? We are talking about a system. Not natural resources but a fukking system based on skin color.
@BmoreGorilla
The more I listen, the more I see this guy [Tariq] is just talking in circles. If you take him away from his talking points then he begins to ramble and/or interjects with another talking point. He seems dim and doesn't have a firm grasp on what he is trying to convey. He warps arguments to buttress his talking points. You know someone speaks with a slant when they debate in absolute terms. Other than that he has an underlying disdain for Africans and other black immigrants and minority groups. He slick said Nigerian doctors are allowed to prosper under white supremacy (just stupid really) and that they can decide to deport them back to their villages if they wanted to. Villages huh?. Crusade against white supremacy but then use white supremacist ideologies against your fellow black people brehs.
AJaRuleStan
All Star
>Son, wtf are you talking aboutSon, wtf are you talking about? We are talking about a system. Not natural resources but a fukking system based on skin color.
I was very explicit about what I was specifically responding too. There is zero vagueness in my post. I couldn't be more clear, so stop acting like a fukking fgt and pretending to be confused.
Shultz was easily outclassed
You weren't clear. You was on some Oswald Bates ish.
OG Talk
Archived
I'm actually surprised at how easily Tariq destroyed Schultz. He comes off a little shaky when he's on CNN and Fox. I guess the shorter formats don't serve him as well. Because I've never been impressed when he was debating Tucker or on Dr. Drew.
But he put this Schultz character in a body bag with relative ease.
But he put this Schultz character in a body bag with relative ease.
Tariq lost points every time he suggested that a black person in who managed to be in a position of influence or power was a "Token". That's a weak argument, which proved Andrew's point.
OG Talk
Archived
Instead of token, Tariq should be using the term "outlier" at times.
Whenever we speak on Black poverty, racists whites will throw out Oprah or LeBron. They aren't exactly tokens but they are outliers.
I think he confuses the two.
Outlier is a perfect term. Token suggest that the the black person wasn't qualified to be in their position.