even if modern western [white] culture is the least racist, the problems seem to stem from the fact that it is the dominant culture. so whatever racism there is, it's magnified significantly.

for example: the internet often likes to claim that black american culture is way more racist than white american culture. assuming this to be true, look at how little an effect this has. black communities, groups, event, whatever organization can be as racist as they want and we as white people essentially laugh it off as being funny or ignore it or use it as political leverage. it doesn't effect us unless we go out of our way to let it effect us.

then look at the reverse, assuming white culture is the least racist. it categorically devastates communities, groups, generations, events, etc. even after decades of us collectively and actively trying to not be racist, systemic or otherwise.

Rachel Doleza is a brave Black American hero.

If Men can be women,
If women can be men,
If Atheist can become leaders of religious groups,
If illegal aliens can become American persons,
IF Michael Jackson can be white,
Rachel Doleza can be black.


And the racist backlash from black community:
What makes up racial identity?

I never said poverty doesn't disproportionately affect black americans. I KNOW it does. And so does harsher prison sentences.
There's, without a doubt, historical baggage that still affects black americans to this day (not to mention outright racism on a daily basis).

What I said is, gentrification is not a race issue directly, but a socio-economic issue. They are not being pushed out because they are black. They are being pushed out because they are poor. There's a big difference. Gentrification still happens in communities that are poor, even if there isn't a single black person (or any other minority) in it.

Of course you could then argue that they are poor BECAUSE they are black, which is true, but they are not being specifically targeted in gentrification for being black. If they were black and had money they probably wouldn't feel the need or want to move away. Unless living in the middle of white people (who are still the majority, so it's statistically probable to have a bigger percentage of them around) is now just by itself a horrible thing (by itself! I'm not saying there couldn't be issues from being a minority living in the middle of the majority).

Also it really doesn't matter what your opinion (or any other american) of how white the average portuguese person is. In my neck of the woods I'm pretty white, and that's what counts.

I'm fully aware of the usual "Isn't Portugal in Spain?" crap

edit: Also... REALLY not cool calling me out on the Factual Gamer thing, as it has absolutely zero to do with this issue.

Aw really, Empire?

You're the factual gamer. ..but apparently that's where the facts end.

You didn't look up and facts about poverty disproportionally affects black americans?

Besides, you're Portuguese. No?

I wouldn't consider that "white" exactly.

European, sure.
White.. not so much.

I feel like you'd be treated like an " exotic foreigner" in polite white america.

You'd definitely be considered Latino or "Mexican" in more ignorant places here.

Tho if you're some how totally WASPy looking, I could understand why you're on the denialism boat.

Now we're arguing semantics. Yummy.

racism:"noun
1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement"
See, the keyword here is achievement. There are no achievements without any form of judgement. Think of it in the most simple terms, X Box or Steam achievements. Let's say you play Call Of Duty 18 and get the "Used a gun!" achievement for firing the very first shot in the game. You got this because the game's code made a judgement. Did the player fire a shot? Yes or no. Sure, it's easy to judge that, the facts are very clear and easy to read. Are you worthy of this achievement? Are you as much worth as I am, the guy who finished the game and got the achievement?
And what about the guy who never got that achievement because he played the entire game only using a knife? Think about it, playing any Call Of Duty single player campaign using only melee weapons and throwing knives. Who's worthy know? Who achieved more?
Achievement depends entirely on the definition and who's making them. The knife guy played the way harder game and got no recognition but the guy who got the "Used A Gun!" and the "1000 Headshots!" achievement is the one bragging online about his achievements and medals next to his name.
Who has achieved more, the ethnic group that developed many different technologies (like, say, guns) or the ethnic group that still runs naked through the jungle and considers knives high-tech? "Those naked dudes are clearly stupid and less developed than I am because I got guns!" said the white man in Africa.
One of the biggest racist prejudices black americans hear is that they are lazy because they achieve so much less than white folk. They guys with the titles and medals and guns.
Achievements are the acknowledgements that you gained skills, positions, posessions, knowledge or reputation. That can only be acknowledged becaused somebody judged you. Like the test or dissertation I have to write to become a Professor of Physics. This achievement will cause other to have prejudices about me, like "He's a professor, he must be smart!"
The definition of racism you posted says this:
"racism is the belief that depending on your race you can develop in a certain way or to a certain level"
This is a modern definition based on racist expirience. It says that racists think you can not achieve more than they can based on the achievements your ancestors had compared to theirs. "Once a slave, always a slave. If black people weren't so lazy, they wouldn't need a good whipping!" That train of thought.
All that of course underplays the emotional component of hatred, the driving force of racism in its worst forms.
Now my fingers hurt.

Presumably he didn't. Thanks god I'm not a black American.

"Black Americans can be anything they want to be... as long as it's the President, or like, shot."

I like these people.

If black americans really do have any kind of tendency towards being poorly educated or poorly civilised, is it because they have only very recently been allowed to have any education or any part in civilisation. And i'm not necessarily willing to accept that premise, because there similarly plenty of white americans who are also extremely poorly educated and poorly civilised. I know that because i caught honey boo-boo on TV once. It doesn't help that your legal system is inherently racist as evidenced by the shocking prison statistics for black americans; whitey made sure that 'black people' crime is highly punishable and 'white people' crime isn't. Just listen to what this man has to tell you.

Your advice to someone who lives in bad area is "Buy a house in a nice area?" OMFG I NEVER THOUGHT OF THIS!!! Why don't starving people in third world countries just move house? Why don't people who live in warzones move? Why don't the Palestinians just move? Why don't isolated, terrified old ladies move out of dangerous apartment blocks and council estates? Why don't abused women just leave their husbands? Why don't abused children just run away and tell a policeman? Why don't .... you just shut the fuck up? Honestly, better to keep silent and have people think you're stupid and racist than to share your blindingly idiotic comments and remove all doubt.

They are born there, they can't afford to move, they are supporting family who live there (and can't afford to move), they can't get a job anywhere else, they can't go to school anywhere else, there's no one particularly educated amongst them to help them out? Any of the above and millions more reasons (that i don't know because i never experienced it, nor did you)?

Black people were treated like sub-humans, murdered in the street without comment and for no particular reason, beaten, tortured, forced to work, forced to fight, bred for strength and most of all.... kept in the fucking dark about everything, because stupid slaves are easier to control.

Generation after generation of being bred for work traits; intelligence systematically discouraged. So anyone who's around now was raised by people who were raised by people with no education, property or hope through no fault of their own. Add to that inherent racism as explained CLEARLY to you by this video. So the black people today are a product of their environment. And in a way, that excuses you for being a disgusting, poorly-educated, ignorant racist because the apple never falls far from the tree... and you're not worth any more of my time.

Don't understand why you are asking that question? The video is the answer, and it's summarised for you in the description. The answer is that they were handed a piece of paper that did not have any current (at the time) American law on it - but were misled by someone into thinking that it was. I hope that's clear enough and i've highlighted it so you can see it easily.

Are you trying to make a point, or did you not get that from the seventeen different ways it was said in the video and description?

Additionally to that point, i strongly suspect that in the professional legal industry, mistakes like that simply do not happen by accident. They are at the very top some of the most important legal decisions being made in the entire world, and i'm supposed to believe that they accidentally overlooked something that had been decided over 30 years ago and entirely changed police policy? Whoops i just printed off a 30 year old law, and i thought it was the present day one? Do you think the members of the jury didn't think, "Hmmm, are you sure it's legal to shoot random people as long as they're running away? We don't see that very often anymore.... Odd!" And when they ask that they're told, "Well there's the law right there for ya, i'm as surprised as you but i won't double check the modernity of it!" Only to be told days before the decision that perhaps maybe parts of the second bit of the bit i gave you earlier might not be valid, but we don't want to get into technicalities here, don't worry about it.

It's fucking corrupt, someone's (more likely to be many people) pulled a fast one... but worse still, someone's pulled a fast one on a HUGELY important case and had the arrogance to think they'd get away with something that simple. When you think of the protests in Ferguson and many many people showing support, how could they be so flippant? It doesn't just point towards racism, it confirms every racist suspicion that you might have had about the American legal system. It's not a one-off when it happens at the very top of the pyramid, that's how the best of the legal eagles in America deals with the problem of a white policeman killing a black man.... it was his fault, he's bad, he deserved it.

They were right under the microscope here - are you racist? And what did they do? Surely this is evidence of a system that lets down black people, and therefore it urgently needs to be fixed... and what about past offenders? I'd be pretty angry, if i were a black American. It's not just a let down, it's a dupe.

"I'm so upset by the relentless state mandated murder of black Americans, that I'm actually somehow more angry and personally hurt about the implication that I may actually be complicit in perpetuating racism and racist attitudes, than the actual problem!"

Racism is institutional first and foremost. Come back to me when white people have a history as being treated as slaves, come back to me when you are considered dirty on mass just for the colour of your skin, come back to me when you struggle to find a job just about anywhere, come back to me when the picture printed of you in a newspaper is one that depicts you as a victim at fault.
Come back to me after you've sat your arse down and listened to the lived experiences of people of colour.
Then you might realise that white people don't have all the answers, and we should shut the fuck up, sit the hell down and listen.

Historical Rift? Anyways this is somewhat true, I know two guys who are Africans who moved to America and they do have some problems with some African Americans. I've seen one get really mad at them since he's a substitute teacher as well.

BTW I don't like the term African Americans, it seems to me that people who have come from Africa recently and have become American citizens should be considered African Americans. Those who's families have been here longer than most everyone, from the original formation of our nation in my opinion would be called Black Americans. They are not Africans and they have nothing to do with Africa, but there is such thing as a black culture and a black America which some might identify with quite strongly. Also more to the point who the fuck is African? You ask someone from the Continent of Africa where he's from he says Kenya, or South Africa, or Liberia. They don't say, OH just somewhere on that GIANT FUCKING CONTINENT!

In a better society we'd simply call them Goddamn Americans and be done with it. However in our society there are some definable lines that should be respected and recognized. And hopefully and eventually overcome completely.

As of 2014, there are more black Americans (African Americans) serving time in prison for nonviolent drug offenses than there were slaves in 1850.

I don't disagree about the snooping since 2001. As far as the koch brothers and the Tea Party, you don't know what the fuck your talking about.

They just want the Constitution follow or at least print current laws back towards it.

Instead of watching biased Democratic sucking media, go to an actual event .

They are not raciest, or the desire to go back to slavery as the media puts forth. . That's Bullshit. B.W.Y. the slavery shit and the KKK was the Democrat south doing its thing, not Republicans. MLK was Republican.


Today the Republican party is nothing more than a cheap intimation of the Democrat party. They will never win fighting that way. The Tea Party is they way to go.


FYI a little history ... Since you had a public education and hence only learned skewed left leaning revised history...


http://www.humanevents.com/2006/08/16/why-martin-luther-king-was-republican/

"
It should come as no surprise that Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. was a Republican. In that era, almost all black Americans were Republicans. Why? From its founding in 1854 as the anti-slavery party until today, the Republican Party has championed freedom and civil rights for blacks. And as one pundit so succinctly stated, the Democrat Party is as it always has been, the party of the four S’s: slavery, secession, segregation and now socialism.

It was the Democrats who fought to keep blacks in slavery and passed the discriminatory Black Codes and Jim Crow laws. The Democrats started the Ku Klux Klan to lynch and terrorize blacks. The Democrats fought to prevent the passage of every civil rights law beginning with the civil rights laws of the 1860s, and continuing with the civil rights laws of the 1950s and 1960s.

During the civil rights era of the 1960s, Dr. King was fighting the Democrats who stood in the school house doors, turned skin-burning fire hoses on blacks and let loose vicious dogs. It was Republican President Dwight Eisenhower who pushed to pass the Civil Rights Act of 1957 and sent troops to Arkansas to desegregate schools. President Eisenhower also appointed Chief Justice Earl Warren to the U.S. Supreme Court, which resulted in the 1954 Brown v. Board of Education decision ending school segregation. Much is made of Democrat President Harry Truman’s issuing an Executive Order in 1948 to desegregate the military. Not mentioned is the fact that it was Eisenhower who actually took action to effectively end segregation in the military.

Democrat President John F. Kennedy is lauded as a proponent of civil rights. However, Kennedy voted against the 1957 Civil Rights Act... And after he became President, Kennedy was opposed to the 1963 March on Washington by Dr. King that was organized by A. Phillip Randolph, who was a black Republican.

The Democrats were loosing the slavery battle and civil rights were breaking through and JFK/Johnson the

Given the circumstances of that era, it is understandable why Dr. King was a Republican. It was the Republicans who fought to free blacks from slavery and amended the Constitution to grant blacks freedom (13th Amendment), citizenship (14th Amendment) and the right to vote (15th Amendment). Republicans passed the civil rights laws of the 1860s, including the Civil Rights Act of 1866 and the Reconstruction Act of 1867 that was designed to establish a new government system in the Democrat-controlled South, one that was fair to blacks. Republicans also started the NAACP and affirmative action with Republican President Richard Nixon’s 1969 Philadelphia Plan (crafted by black Republican Art Fletcher) that set the nation’s fist goals and timetables. Although affirmative action now has been turned by the Democrats into an unfair quota system, affirmative action was begun by Nixon to counter the harm caused to blacks when Democrat President Woodrow Wilson in 1912 kicked all of the blacks out of federal government jobs.

Few black Americans know that it was Republicans who founded the Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Unknown also is the fact that Republican Sen. Everett Dirksen from Illinois was key to the passage of civil rights legislation in 1957, 1960, 1964 and 1965. Not mentioned in recent media stories about extension of the 1965 Voting Rights Act is the fact that Dirksen wrote the language for the bill. Dirksen also crafted the language for the Civil Rights Act of 1968 which prohibited discrimination in housing. President Lyndon Johnson could not have achieved passage of civil rights legislation without the support of Republicans."


Democrats are still in the slavery business. They just use the welfare system to keep the poor poor and use the shallow promise of If you vote Democrat we will keep giving you a little cheese.

The Democrat party has been the most destructive political party to date.

Please check this out http://tinyurl.com/cmadwhj and if you don't, here's the gist: Nation that re-elected Obama wants more spending cuts than tax hikes, still hates Obamacare

So if you obama voters don't like the guy's speeches or obamacare, WHY EXACTLY DID YOU VOTE FOR HIM?

Black Americans--hit hardest by the King's economic policies--voted for him. It makes no sense unless you realize his followers are electing an image, not a leader.

It's hilarious to me that this thugverment, which has ignored the Constitution for decades (both sides in differing ways) is suddenly standing behind the RULE OF LAW to keep Texas from seceding (just in case).

At least the guy that made this video is willing to explore the idea. Where are the "open-minded" liberals now?

I don't hate the King because he's Black, I hate his followers for letting him take over because he's Black and his opposers for being too scared of being called RAY-SISS to call him out.

The only thing two tricks the libs got are still going strong: Cry Racism and Raise Taxes. AND HERE WE ARE AGAIN!