Thomas Sowell discusses his newest book, Intellectuals and Race

[No_bammer_weed]

that isnt what i asked you, im actually neutral about that thesis, but im asking if you have an explanation of why the black family did not break and apparently got stronger after slavery and then got worse during the 60's

Im not interested in an exchange with you, but I cant bite my tongue while you flood this thread with perverse and dishonest posts. Saying the black family "got stronger" during Jim Crow is beyond the pale, and not fit for an intellectual discussion. You're neck deep in st0rmfr0nt territory at this point.. During Jim Crow, the black family had an out of wedlock birthrate that was much higher than the national average, and that of white people, and the poverty rate among black families was astronomical. Feel free to provide any statistics of yours that prove otherwise.

I have my theories for why the black wedlock rate MOVED with the national rate post civil rights, and conversely you are entitled to uncle tom you way through your arguments, but you do not have license to promote your own set of facts.

 

[Serious]

. I hope you read this and then decides to read up on the U.S. economy and understand the severity of the financial fiasco that is bubbling in the background.

 

[theworldismine13]

Im not interested in an exchange with you, but I cant bite my tongue while you flood this thread with perverse and dishonest posts. Saying the black family "got stronger" during Jim Crow is beyond the pale, and not fit for an intellectual discussion. You're neck deep in st0rmfr0nt territory at this point.. During Jim Crow, the black family had an out of wedlock birthrate that was much higher than the national average, and that of white people, and the poverty rate among black families was astronomical. Feel free to provide any statistics of yours that prove otherwise.

I have my theories for why the black wedlock rate MOVED with the national rate post civil rights, and conversely you are entitled to uncle tom you way through your arguments, but you do not have license to promote your own set of facts.

Spare me your emotional drivel, at the end of the day we have to study and understand why black people during Jim Crow and massive discrimination where doing things that we have trouble doing today when we have vastly more resources and more freedom then they did, it's obvious we have made a wrong turn somewhere and are not doing things optimally and efficiently, the only way to correct things is to study the past

The point I'm getting it is that the level of racism is not what will determine our future, it's black themselves that will determine our future

Stop posting me your corny ass righteous indignation and your wack ass white liberalism

 

[No_bammer_weed]

Spare me your emotional drivel, at the end of the day we have to study and understand why black people during Jim Crow and massive discrimination where doing things that we have trouble doing today when we have vastly more resources and more freedom then they did, it's obvious we have made a wrong turn somewhere and are not doing things optimally and efficiently, the only way to correct things is to study the past

The point I'm getting it is that the level of racism is not what will determine our future, it's black themselves that will determine our future

Stop posting me your corny ass righteous indignation and your wack ass white liberalism

I didnt ask for all this, and I certainly didnt read it. I asked for empirical, hard evidence that supports your thesis, and that of Sowell's, that the black family was far more prosperous, and psychologically stable while living under a state of sanctioned terrorism. Please consult the white supremacist literature and studies you frequent in order to show me the receipts.

 

[theworldismine13]

I didnt ask for all this, and I certainly didnt read it. I asked for empirical, hard evidence that supports your thesis, and that of Sowell's, that the black family was far more prosperous, and psychologically stable while living under a state of sanctioned terrorism. Please consult the white supremacist literature and studies you frequent in order to show me the receipts.

I can't do that because that assertion was never made, the assertion was that out of wedlock births increased during the 50's and 60's

 

[ghostwriterx]

[quote="theworldismine13, post: 7485274, member: 1247"
i think the whole "fighting racism" notion is a corny leftist construct[/quote]


fighting for justice is a "leftist" construct and a "corny" one at that?

 

[Blackking]

Sowell takes a shallow view of culture where it's mostly the result of free, individual decisions, and also has no interest in sociological data except when he's talking about how far behind Black people are when it comes to achievement.

This is true and where people like him lose me.... and lose other people who would normally be on the their side.

 

[theworldismine13]

[quote="theworldismine13, post: 7485274, member: 1247"
i think the whole "fighting racism" notion is a corny leftist construct

fighting for justice is a "leftist" construct and a "corny" one at that?
[/quote]



yeah, black people should stop fighting for justice and equality, we should be fighting to be on top

 

[Blackking]

Lazy is a word you putting in his mouth, he never said black people are lazy

He has entire papers surrounded around the idea of black people being lazy and simply unmotivated - as a reason why we aren't successful.... I've read them. this isn't the first thing he's written.

 

[theworldismine13]

He has entire papers surrounded around the idea of black people being lazy and simply unmotivated - as a reason why we aren't successful.... I've read them. this isn't the first thing he's written.

i would love to read these papers, you have any links?

 

[Blackking]

i would love to read these papers, you have any links?

He is probably the GOAT downplayer of discrimination and disenfranchisement of all time....


When statistics show that sons of high school dropouts don't become doctors or scientists nearly as often as the sons of Ph.D.s, that is taken as a sign that American society is not "fair."

If equal probabilities of achieving some goal is your definition of fairness, then we should all get together -- people of every race, color, creed, national origin, political ideology and sexual preference -- and stipulate that life has never been fair, anywhere or any time in all the millennia of recorded history.

Then we can begin at last to talk sense.

I know that I never had an equal chance to become a great ballet dancer like Rudolph Nureyev. The thought of becoming a ballet dancer never once crossed my mind in all the years when I was growing up in Harlem. I suspect that the same thought never crossed the minds of most of the guys growing up on New York's lower east side.

Does that mean that there were unfair barriers keeping us from following in the footsteps of Rudolph Nureyev?

A very distinguished scholar once mentioned at a social gathering that, as a young man, he was not thinking of going to college until someone else, who recognized his ability, urged him to do so.

Another very distinguished scholar told me that, although his parents were anti-Semitic, it was the fact that he went to a school with many Jewish children that got him interested in intellectual matters and led him into an academic career.

All groups, families and cultures are not even trying to do the same things, so the fact that they do not all end up equally represented everywhere can hardly be automatically attributed to "barriers" created by "society."

Barriers are external obstacles, as distinguished from internal values and aspirations -- unless you are going to play the kind of word games that redefine achievements as "privileges" and treat an absence of evidence of discrimination as only proof of how diabolically clever and covert the discrimination is.

 

[Blackking]

lol, HE always puts Obama and hitler in the same page.... But it's ok I guess because he's black


One of the best peace speeches I ever read was one delivered back in the 1930s -- by Adolf Hitler! He knew that peace speeches would keep the Western democracies from matching his military buildup with their own, or attacking him to prevent his buildup from continuing. Peace speeches by Iran today serve the same purpose of buying time -- until they can create a nuclear bomb.

President Obama really has a way with words, such as calling the problems that millions of people have had trying to sign up for ObamaCare "glitches." When the Titanic sank, was that a "glitch"?

Among the painful signs of our time are TV programs built around paternity tests. Apparently the way these women live, it is anybody's guess who their child's father might be.

Don't you love it when a politicians says, "I take full responsibility"? Translated into plain English, that says, "Now that I have admitted it, there is nothing more for me to do (such as resign) and nothing for anyone else to do (such as fire me)." Saying "I take full responsibility" is like a get-out-of-jail-free card in the Monopoly game.

No one seems as certain that they know what the Republicans need to do to win presidential elections as those Republicans who have lost presidential elections, such as Mitt Romney, John McCain and Bob Dole. Moreover, people take them seriously, and seem not to notice that what the losers advocate is the opposite of what won Ronald Reagan two landslide election victories.

If you believe in equal rights, then what do "women's rights," "gay rights," etc., mean? Either they are redundant or they are violations of the principle of equal rights for all.

One of the painfully sobering realizations that come from reading history is the utter incompetence that is possible among leaders of whole nations and empires -- and the blind faith that such leaders can nevertheless inspire among the people who are enthralled by their words or their posturing.

 

[DEAD7]

fighting for justice is a "leftist" construct and a "corny" one at that?

Fighting racism ≠ fighting for justice.

 

[DEAD7]

If you believe in equal rights, then what do "women's rights," "gay rights," etc., mean? Either they are redundant or they are violations of the principle of equal rights for all.

I believe this is true, and I would love to hear your argument(s) to the contrary.

 

[theworldismine13]

He is probably the GOAT downplayer of discrimination and disenfranchisement of all time....


When statistics show that sons of high school dropouts don't become doctors or scientists nearly as often as the sons of Ph.D.s, that is taken as a sign that American society is not "fair."

If equal probabilities of achieving some goal is your definition of fairness, then we should all get together -- people of every race, color, creed, national origin, political ideology and sexual preference -- and stipulate that life has never been fair, anywhere or any time in all the millennia of recorded history.

Then we can begin at last to talk sense.

I know that I never had an equal chance to become a great ballet dancer like Rudolph Nureyev. The thought of becoming a ballet dancer never once crossed my mind in all the years when I was growing up in Harlem. I suspect that the same thought never crossed the minds of most of the guys growing up on New York's lower east side.

Does that mean that there were unfair barriers keeping us from following in the footsteps of Rudolph Nureyev?

A very distinguished scholar once mentioned at a social gathering that, as a young man, he was not thinking of going to college until someone else, who recognized his ability, urged him to do so.

Another very distinguished scholar told me that, although his parents were anti-Semitic, it was the fact that he went to a school with many Jewish children that got him interested in intellectual matters and led him into an academic career.

All groups, families and cultures are not even trying to do the same things, so the fact that they do not all end up equally represented everywhere can hardly be automatically attributed to "barriers" created by "society."

Barriers are external obstacles, as distinguished from internal values and aspirations -- unless you are going to play the kind of word games that redefine achievements as "privileges" and treat an absence of evidence of discrimination as only proof of how diabolically clever and covert the discrimination is.

i dont understand this post, is this what you are saying or is this a quote?