setting a watchman

[Amarok]

says the one person here who has never even introduced himself to me.

Don't need to reading your comments sums you up .

Blindly judge other's much?

Nope blindly would be without seeing . I'm judging you on what I see. And what I see is a mental case .

[Joods]

I see the problem. Drippy isn't getting laid.

Well....if you were married to that, would you fuck him?

Nope. Not with a ten foot pole.

[Drich]

lol, someone hasn't heard about colonialism.

Also, saying African countries don't have many resources is uninformed. Many do -- oil, bauxite, gold, iron and so on -- but those leases are owned and operated by the foreign companies left in place after the liberation of colonies.

This entire thread is a monument to the post hoc fallacy. Africa isn't screwed because it's run by blacks. Africa is screwed because colonialization prevented the formation of stable governments in many cases, up until the 1960s. It's also screwed because organized religion still plays a huge role in their societies, leading to high rates of HIV, large populations (meaning lower per-capita incomes), and violence perpetrated or inspired by the faithful.

lol... Someone doesn't know the socioeconomic placement the sum total of African ran countries had before colonialism. Again at best most countries were akin to what a bronze age city state would look like. the vast majority were still well placed in the stone age.

You are right to say the african countries did not ever develop, but again they never left the stone age for the 10's of thousands of years that preceded colonialism either. (there was a reason colonialists were shoot tribes men with muskets, that were armed with cows hide shields and stone tipped spears.)

it is not a fault or failing of a content of people. The development of the "africa"/nations is only less developed when you compare it to modern society. They were simply on a different path, one that lent itself to the status quo rather than change.

That is why or rather Harper lee's Atticus describes black people as a "young race" that needs direction and guidance. With it He describes the vast differences between black people here living in America verse black people who were left to their own development.

That is why there isn't equality nor ever will be if black Americans seek to be anything other than just an american first.
Whites from all over and many different nations dropped their identity to be Americans first. so do Asians and middle easterners and the like. You can talk to first gen transplants they are Americans. then associate with origin. as such I believe most of the country on an individual basis see those people as equal share Americans. However if a middle easterner identifies Taliban or what ever iron age based faction they are apart of first.  then identifies as american... Most people would no longer see that man as an equal.

To be an american is a social status without race. it is a collective that we must all agree to be apart of first.. for whites if Germany calls and says all white germany of fighting age report back to the father land... then the white men who leave are not seen as Americans. (which did happen in WWII as well as for the Italians and Japanese) The Same is true here with black people. to hold them self as "Y"(anything) before American is a form of self segergation. Martain Luther King Jr. rebuked the Malcom X doctrine that morphed into the term "black American." MLKjr want equality and saw that if one was 'black' before american that 'he would never belong to america first. because ALL other races must give up their home identifies to truly be consider an american.

So for black people to want to hold on to a stone age identifier or to be considered to be anything besides an american, creates a self imposed segergation that will never allow for equality. The ultimate end/Why would someone retain their orgin status over being considered an American? conflict or domination. Those are the only two logical outcomes. History bears out this fact over and over and over again. a country who can not unite will fall

---

---

Ah... nuupe I didn't.

That's call spin sport. Spin is when one cherry picks and then re-imagines a close but new meaning to what was said.

This is literally what you said. 

So why aren't black people as an stand alone group seen as equals? The same reason Koreans who support the Kim regime are not seen as equals, for the same reason white who support communism or Nazi socialism are not seen as equals or any other race who does not support America first

See what I mean by spin???
because this is what I said
So why aren't black people as an stand alone group seen as equals? The same reason Koreans who support the Kim regime are not seen as equals, for the same reason white who support communism or Nazi socialism are not seen as equals or any other race who does not support America first, or anyone who only seeks to take from this country and not put back, those who seek to hurt or those who seek a broader national identity first. will never be seen as equal. The thing is 'young people are generally entitled to just take and have things their way and not play the game like everyone else.

(you cherry picked 1/2 a paragraph and that allowed you to change the narritive)

When you add the 2nd paragraph it does not lead you to your statment but would have the reader ask why would someone seeking to perserve his culture over that of the collective 'melting pot' american culture...

The answer is because all races forgo their countries of orgins to become americans. white on mass were stripped of photos heirlooms renamed so not to sound german jewish or whatever. the idea was to assimilate everyone and melt us all together and have this new thing this new country...

To be seen as a African, or korean or ISIS or NAZi american puts that social order above and in front of what the rest of this country has sacrificed in order to be an american. it is a form of self segergation.

I go on in detail in my last post.

[Thumpalumpacus]

Someone doesn't know that iron was first smelted in ... wait for it ... Africa. Someone hasn't heard of the Malian Kingdoms. Someone doesn't realize that the corporations which are vestigial results of colonialism siphon the wealth out of the continent. Someone hasn't read history beyond what is spoonfed here in America.

Someone needs to buy a clue ... but that someone is, mentally speaking, flat broke.

You'll notice I'm not answering anything you have to write about American race relations. The overwhelming majority of blacks I know identify as American. You're simply regurgitating tired talking points that don't merit much thought at all -- something you've obviously recognized, because clearly you've given them none yourself. What separatism there is might, just might, be the result of three centuries of slavery followed by 100 years of Jim Crow.

Now go read a book or ten. Please.

[Drich]

says the one person here who has never even introduced himself to me.

Don't need to reading your comments sums you up  .

Blindly judge other's much?

Nope blindly would be without seeing . I'm judging you on what I see. And what I see is a mental case .

Without interaction then how do you know what you perceive to be true? How do you know where my thought end and begin? Do you even know you are reading a synopsis and commentary on a literary work of fiction?

What you are reading here is my take as an american of Korean decent on what Harper Lee wrote in the book Go set a watch men. But you did not know that did you? That is because you chose to quickly judge from ignorance rather than make any effort trying to understand what to you must be a new concept. Because you clearly know nothing of what you have wrongfully judged. You have no idea where Harper lee's ideas and philosophy in the book begin or end. you are just some self righteous looser who wanted to jump on the hate wagon without having to think too much, but you got called out and severed all at once.

Here's a little tip for next time sport. at least try and make some kind of effort to understand what the big boys in the room are talking about or maybe you ought just hold off on the meme and snipe comments after we leave the thread... otherwise you get to be dissected in front of everyone each and everytime you make an intellectually dishonest comment.

---

I see the problem. Drippy isn't getting laid.

Well....if you were married to that, would you fuck him?

Nope. Not with a ten foot pole.

No 10' pole needed

I come equipt with my own

[Thumpalumpacus]

Every time I think you've plumbed the depths of idiocy, you grab your shovel and set to work with a vengeance.

That isn't a shovel Drich is using -- it's a razzafracking backhoe.

lol, Drich in action:

[Crossless2.0]

lol, someone hasn't heard about colonialism.

Also, saying African countries don't have many resources is uninformed. Many do -- oil, bauxite, gold, iron and so on -- but those leases are owned and operated by the foreign companies left in place after the liberation of colonies.

This entire thread is a monument to the post hoc fallacy. Africa isn't screwed because it's run by blacks. Africa is screwed because colonialization prevented the formation of stable governments in many cases, up until the 1960s. It's also screwed because organized religion still plays a huge role in their societies, leading to high rates of HIV, large populations (meaning lower per-capita incomes), and violence perpetrated or inspired by the faithful.

lol... Someone doesn't know the socioeconomic placement the sum total of African ran countries had before colonialism. Again at best most countries were akin to what a bronze age city state would look like. the vast majority were still well placed in the stone age.

You are right to say the african countries did not ever develop, but again they never left the stone age for the 10's of thousands of years that preceded colonialism either. (there was a reason colonialists were shoot tribes men with muskets, that were armed with cows hide shields and stone tipped spears.)

it is not a fault or failing of a content of people. The development of the "africa"/nations is only less developed when you compare it to modern society. They were simply on a different path, one that lent itself to the status quo rather than change.

A different path . . . lol . . . and someone else hasn't read Guns, Germs, and Steel. Eurasian ascendancy was the outcome of a cumulative process that didn't happen in a vacuum. If a people has a decisive head start in terms of certain useful resources (e.g., flora and fauna that easily lend themselves to domestication) or benefit from surroundings that favor the spread of ideas and goods, and then have to innovate to overcome other challenges their environments impose on them, then it shouldn't come as a great surprise that they tend to dominate other peoples when their paths cross. (Of course, a population -- long inured -- carrying virulent diseases that other people lack resistance to doesn't hurt either.)

So yeah, sub-Saharan Africa didn't develop along the same lines as Europe. The question is, to what do you attribute the difference? Differences in racial/ethnic intelligence levels? A predilection for the status quo rather than change? If this last, how do you determine that, and how do you account for the fact that almost every "backward" people, upon coming into contact with materially superior outsiders, almost immediately seek to acquire this better technology for their own use? Apparently, they had no trouble recognizing a good thing when they saw it and didn't mind such change.

And don't underestimate the effects of colonialism in shaping the destinies of many of these nations. Set arbitrary national borders, plunder a land long enough, pit tribes against each other, infantilize the "natives" and then what? Pretend to be surprised when things are fucked up when you leave or finally are chased out?

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm just going to leave this here for the next poster to use:



Have fun!

[Drich]

Someone doesn't know that iron was first smelted in ... wait for it ... Africa.

OMg... OMg... waiting for it.... still waiting... Seriously?!?!? do you think the "iron age" refers to the point when Iron first got smelted???



So sorry sport. "The Iron age" like all "ages of men" refer the key elements that changed the socioeconomic growth of a society. it what spurs new developments invention, social climates, trade and war. It does not matter where iron was smelted it matters how it changed a given society. plus simply smelting iron means nothing aside form throwing metorites into a hot fire. Casting iron is where the fun starts and that didn't happen in Africa that was a Chinese thing. (still about 500 years before the iron age)

Someone hasn't heard of the Malian Kingdoms.

Who's culture in the 12to 1400's mirrored that of a post bronze pre iron-age people. all whom have been scattered to the wind for almost 500 years.

Someone doesn't realize that the corporations which are vestigial results of colonialism siphon the wealth out of the continent.

nope. got it.. I also get that without colonialism All of Africa would look like it's war torn bits. That in most places colonialism has left behind it's infrastructure. governement, democracy, the ideas of education, soceity, religion, preservation of human life.

Someone hasn't read history beyond what is spoonfed here in America.

Someone needs to buy a clue ... but that someone is, mentally speaking, flat broke.

Again, not my idea... read the op sport. just my commentary on what harper lee had to say about black people in her last book

You'll notice I'm not answering anything you have to write about American race relations.

I know most white people feel they are not allowed to say anything to do with race. It's good to know that when you think you know you place you yield.

The overwhelming majority of blacks I know identify as American.

Actually my best friend would call himself an american period. like I do.

However he is of a completely different socioeconomic class that the black people I've work with in the intercity. most people there see them selves as Afro Americans or black Americans. That means they honor and abide by the rules of the community first, then the rule and law of America.

Again self imposed segregation.

You're simply regurgitating tired talking points that don't merit much thought at all -- something you've obviously recognized, because clearly you've given them none yourself.

Actually I have NEVER heard these talking points at all and that is after 20+ years working directly with black people in several different ministries.

Never understood why there was such a descrepency or divide between how white people think and how black people think about the same things. I never got why black people saw themselves as being treated differently. I can honestly say treatment by the police and realy anyone with money is more of a ecconomic divide than a racial divide. I can promise you driving a transam with no mufflers and a mullet with no shirt gets the same bat to the ball response as "'rolln up on a shorty mindn my own bidness when cop pulled me out of my window of my rolling car." This changed all of that. I understand there is a general lack of infrastructure that can not be manufactured or given it must be earned or a soceity will implode if given too much too fast. Which should help the rest of soceity change in a way to help the younger group better develop without bowing to it.

---

That isn't a shovel Drich is using -- it's a razzafracking backhoe.

lol, Drich in action:

it looks bad, but I dug myself out of worse

[Thumpalumpacus]

*yawn*

Keep digging ... Sport.