what points did he lose on?Y’all daddy Tariq still trying to make up for losing that debate to Tucker Carlson, huh?
The Tariq Nasheed Thread
- Thread starter Kilgore Trout
- Start date
-
- Tags
- ados fba nasheed tariq tariq nasheed
im talking about the tucker debates
AJaRuleStan
All Star
No, in the abstract, it literally wasn't an extension of the black codes. The idea of not being able to attend public school with whypipo is not the same as being forced to work against your will. To argue otherwise is to be plainfully dishonest and just insulting to black people.
Yes, in practice within the real world it was, no one is disputing that. In fact, I literally made that point in my last post. However, the real world implementation is separate from the imagined idea of the implementation which is the factor that explains the ruling behind Plessy V. Ferguson and later why Jim crow eventually died. You're not actually engaging what i'm engaging.
No, it doesn't expose anything about me. It exposes the fact that your IQ is far too low to make the distinction between the abstract versus the real world, which is causing a failure of communication between us. I'm busy exploring the question of why the concept of separate but equally was not immediately flagged by 14th amendment like the black codes were, while you're a making some point about what was happening on the ground as if that was ever up for disagreement.
Yes, you stupid fukk, official racial segregation in the states in that era was acting as a barrier and a degradation to blacks. However, that does not need imply that conceptually speaking, blacks living among other blacks, controlling their own institutions and local gov't is some form of oppression, which is why the idea of separate but equally was able to work around the 14th amendment for time that it did.
Jim Crow was a lot more than just blacks not being able to attend school with whites you stupid motherfukker. You most certainly could be forced to work against your will as a black person during Jim Crow. You could thrown in jail and forced to work like a slave during Jim Crow just for being black same as during the black codes of the 1860s. The Jim Crow laws were literally a new form of the black codes.
at you implying that whites created Jim Crow laws with the "imagined implementation" that they wouldn't be detrimental to blacks while being beneficial to whites. Strengthening white supremacy and ensuring black inferiority was exactly why they were created stupid. Seperate but equal was never a goal not even an imagined one. The only thing relevant to this discussion is what was actually going on, not this abstract bullshyt you're using to deflect.
This is about the debate that tariq had with some Internet c00n over whether white supremacy exists or not. You ran in here taking issue with tariq citing the Dred Scott decision as if that doesn't support his position and I simply checked you.
The bold is completely irrelevant to the discussion. Plus it's a rose colored inaccurate vision of what the Jim Crow laws were and why they were created. The Jim Crow laws were not created to establish some kind of separate but equal society. That wasn't the concept. The concept was to ensure white supremacy and black inferiority. Seperate but equal was just the PR spin that the racists used and here you are in 2017 still spinning.
That nikka Rock Newman is a straight up CAC.
I saw this video in the recommend section after watching his Haiti interview with Tariq.
It's a show about revealing ancestry DNA and this nikka found out that he is 80% CAC.
I saw this video in the recommend section after watching his Haiti interview with Tariq.
It's a show about revealing ancestry DNA and this nikka found out that he is 80% CAC.
AJaRuleStan
All Star
Idk what the fukk you're throwing into the Jim Crow bin, but when i'm using the term, I'm referring to the actual Jim crow laws which were state and local laws that enforced racial segregation in the Southern United States. Enacted by white Democratic-dominated state legislatures in the late 19th century after the Reconstruction period and challenged in Plessy v. Ferguson, Graduate School Desegregation Cases, and Brown vs Ed.
>How do you reconcile the 14th amendment with Jim Crow? - Gravity
So let me get this straight, to respond to your question I have to reference the ruling of Plessy v. Ferguson, however, I can't think about Plessy v. Ferguson case -- or any court case for that matter -- without dealing with the ideas behind the ruling. Yet, if i do that i'm running some sort of deflection foul because I would be arguing about the concept of segregation, rather that how it was particularly implemented in the real world. Yet, if I don't do that, I still run some sort of foul because I didn't respond to your question. Hmm, do you see what you did here. You're basically saying explain X to me, without explaining X to me. I'm sorry but I can't satisfy that demand, neither could any other human walking this planet.
You're pretending that the Jim Crow laws were initially created to establish a seperate but equal society and I'm calling you out for being full of shyt. Jim Crow segregation was always about ensuring white supremacy.
You have to understand that the segregation was only 1-sided meaning blacks were the only one's who were restricted. This isn't something that came about by accident either. The same people who wrote the laws were responsible for how they were enforced. While blacks were denied access to white spaces and resources, whites never had to deal with any of that. Whites were never denied access to black spaces and resources. I don't know what c00n/cracker kool aid you've been drinking but this idea that Jim Crow was ideally supposed to make America "separate but equal" is just looney. Especially in 2017.
This always kills me. You cats get frustrated and won't to give up when challenged by someone not going for your bullshyt
I don't accept your opinions of "the ideas behind the rulings" because you're either inexplicably dumb or you're just flat out lying. You literally trying to give cover to white supremacy. Racism/white supremacy was the cause for segregation. After slavery ended whites wanted to ensure that they remained on a superior position over blacks so they rigged the system in their favor. Segregation is just another word for apartheid. Why would ever argue that Jim Crow segregation was anything other than white supremacy, even ideally? Do you have no shame? Why in the fukk would whites institute racial segregation unless they were going to implement it in a racist way that benefitted them and was detrimental to blacks?
You can't reconcile Jim Crow with the 14th amendment because they contradict each other. Just like the idea of starting a country on the fake ideal that "all men are created equal" contradicts owning slaves. The white man's word has never meant shyt and he has always used deception as one of his most powerful weapons.
AJaRuleStan
All Star
I never once claimed that the genuine motives behind the parties applying the logic of separate but equal were in fact doing so in good faith, actually, I say the opposite in every single post I made regarding the subject. You're just flat out lying about my views here, which i'm not sure why since my earlier post haven't gone anywhere and I can quote them at any moment. I guess this some sort of smear tactic, but it's just totally unnecessary.
Well, first I never made that argument. But let me back up for a minute here; I need to try again at resolving your inability to see the distinction between an instant of an idea and the idea itself. Best way I could put it is that a law saying a black and white child have to attend different schools is a type of Segregation, just like Christianity is a type of Religion, or how Justice League is a type of Movie. Therefore, when i'm talking about Religion, i'm not talking about Christianity and its distinct particularities. The same is true for segregation.
For example, the claim that segregation doesn't necessarily guarantee discrimination for blacks is different from me personally saying that Jim crow, as practiced in the south, didn't result in the discrimination of blacks. This whole time you have been dealing with the ladder by attempting to strawman me as making that case. But in reality, no such thing actually happened. I've been painstakingly trying to make that clear to you, but you just can't separate the two things in your head.
BLΔCK⁂W⊙LF
All Star
People arguing, swearing at one another. Just unproductive behavior.
What do you all think of this?
What do you all think of this?
People arguing, swearing at one another. Just unproductive behavior.
What do you all think of this?
People arguing, swearing at one another. Just unproductive behavior.
What do you all think of this?
Bondye Vodou
Proud practitioner of the "High Science"
People arguing, swearing at one another. Just unproductive behavior.
What do you all think of this?
Thats the exact type of nikka "black hannity" is
Jim Cornette
The Cult of Meat with Extra Cheese...
jesus...
I actually listen to his podcast faithfully and have watched all of the Hidden Colors. Haven't got a chance to check out 1804 yet. However, I do notice he loves to shoehorn in something about someone being "gay" or "moist" and it just seems pointless. Then he tries to clean it up w/ "moist doesn't mean gay" which is clearly bullshyt because he makes up these random stories about getting "hit on" by a moist Uber driver or a nikka on a plane with a belly button piercing in high heels (which sounds hard to believe). But then again these issues are not my main focus as I'm trying to eradicate white supremacy first and foremost. These discussions about the infighting among our community about which nikka is gay etc. can be had after white supremacy is brought to its knees.