Some celebutard named Chris Brown put a beat down on his poptart girlfriend named Rihanna, and the kids in Boston (and presumably in other urban centers around the US) say it's all good.
Of those questioned, ages 12 to 19, 71 percent said that arguing was a normal part of a relationship; 44 percent said fighting was a routine occurrence.If you or your children are looking to Hollywood as an example of how to live, you need seriously examine your values.
Health counselors are specifically concerned with teenagers' views of the controversy. Of the teens questioned, more than half said both Brown, 19, and Rihanna, 21, were equally responsible for the assault. More than half said the media were treating Brown unfairly, and 46 percent said Rihanna was responsible for the incident.
It takes lawyers, money, influence, public adoration, and press goodwill to lead an irresponsible Hollywood lifestyle. Your average citizen just doesn't have that, which explains the trail of failure left by stupid people who are not rich and famous. The jails are full of 50 Cent and Lindsay Lohan wannabes whose cardinal crime was attempting to emulate the rich and famous without the proper array of lifestyle-enabling accessories and accouterments.
Observing celebrity behavior should be like observing animals at the zoo: Often entertaining, sometimes interesting, but never to be copied.
http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2009/03/13/many_boston_teens_surveyed_say_rihanna_is_at_fault_for_assault/
66 comments:
Good info sir.....Gee Silverfiddle, and they all wonder whats wrong in da' hood?
Doesn't take a genius does it?, in fact a third grade education would do, which many don't have thanks to The Three Bromigos, Jesse, AL, and Crazy Louis.....
The political left feeds off of ignorance
Exactly, Silverfiddle. Although I can't say that good behavior is in abundance anywhere, right now. I think most political folks could do with a little obedience school, right now. But their all too arrogant to even consider that maybe the asshole in the middle of the room is them.
I give up on 'em, Silverfiddle. I'm taking up a life in investment and stay away from shitheads as much as possible. I got no use for them, anymore.
Talk later, Silverfiddle.
Ray:
Maybe poverty, gun shops and liquor stores have something to do with the problems in the hood, or is all that just a social construct?
They deserve each other.
CP: I think it has more to do with the steady diet of victimhood. Rev Wright's message is "you can't make it, the man is keeping you down."
Unemployment in my rustbelt state was over 15% when I graduated high school. I couldn't find a job, so I moved. How hard is that?
I don't know about Wright, and that's not who Ray was talking about, but I can't imagine Al Sharpton telling people in "da' hood" as Ray calls it that they "can't make it".
He may say that "without equal economic oppurtunity young brother and sisters will be less likely to make it out of the ghetto and more likely to turn to crime." But that's just a statement of uncontroversial fact.
If an employer is less likely to hire you based purely upon your skin pigmentation, although moving to a less discriminatory place and seeking gainful employment there is an option, that still does not excuse the injustices in their native communities.
Viktor Frankl had a chance to leave like Freud and so many other Jewish people did. Does that excuse Dachau?
False comparison.
Nobody in this country is rounding up, forcibly imprisoning and killing the inner-city poor.
This false comparison is nonetheless instructive because Frankl was stripped of literally everything but what was inside of him and he still managed to overcome. Would Nietzsche call that a triumph of will?
All of us can learn from that.
Yes, a personal triumph of the will. Nevertheless this uneven comparison still drives home the point that any injustice is still injustice, and neither quantity nor quality diminish or excuse injustice.
Viktor Frankl read and liked Nietzsche, didn't he keep quoting him:
"The right why can conquer any how."
Well, why would I like economic fairness: Because as much as it is possible and reasonable everybody deserves a certain quality of life, and should not be all but forced to live in squaller.
How: Give more funding to inner-city schools, legalive drugs, creates more afterschool programs, etc...
I'm not claiming these initiatives would solve the problem and create a utopia, but they would certainly help. Whether blacks and other minorities deserve this little bit of help to their communities is another question, but I think it's because whether they deserve it or not real estate values would go higher in those communities and there would be more educated people to work better jobs.
Life is not fair. Some let that very fact defeat them while others see it as a barrier and figure out how to climb over it.
I'm not arguing with you on that; I agree. Great attitude; the point still remains, unfairness can be made less unfair, and if it was up to your side you wouldn't even try to make it more fair.
Sharpton and all the rest of them are quite successful, so I don't know where you get off saying that unfairness has defeated them.
Sharpton is successful, but most of his followers are not. He and his ilk pretend to be a modern-day Moses that would lead the people out of the bondage of slavery. What BS!
Why do you think that most of his followers are unsuccessful? Because he is trying to help them so poorly that he is actually impeding their success?
I'm sure that affirmative action and other black initiatives Sharpton is trying to move forward are really hurting the black community.
I would say the results speak for themselves.
Correlation does not necessarily mean causation.
How about preferring black and other minority students over white students when deciding whom to give scholarships too?
If there was a black preference you really think that this would disable blacks from receiving quality post-secondary educations?
Those who wallow in self-pity and tell themselves they can't are almost always right.
Those who shrug off the vagaries of unfair circumstances and work hard almost always succeed.
The race of the celebutards in question is purely incidental.
All I know from my years in the military is that no race or gender is better than another, and all the stereotypes are BS.
Go read this by Thomas Sowell:
http://spectator.org/archives/2005/05/11/sowells-rednecks
Keep posting if you want, but I'm through talking about race.
Proactively organizing a political protest for racial fairness, and economic equality, or supporting such endevours is wallowing in self-pity?
You are going to have to stop speaking in generalities and define your terms. Please point to some examples of racial unfairness and economic inequality in the US.
And did you read Dr. Sowell's article?
Sure:
"Today everyone recognizes the shocking failure of so many schools to educate African American children." He dismisses this by pointing out that there are great black scholars. Well, there are great Canadian baseball players too, but that is, in spite of the terrible baseball programs in Canada.
Justin Morneau, doesn't blame Canada, but are there great Canadian baseball players whose potential is not being reached or whose talent is not being nurtured? Of course.
Also, no one is condemning the West for taking too long to abolish slavery (no one I know of). That they have yet to in any way compensate for them is where the criticism of America (not Canada who compensates French, Native and other minorities it had treated poorly in the past in at least some way) is aimed.
Aside from which his is a book about the interpretation of racial history in America, Germany and anywhere else he happened to write about in his book.
If (and I quoted from your source) everyone recognizes the failures of the education system to work for blacks, then obviously that's unfair. Economic inequality!? I believe unemployment is about twice what it is more blacks as it is for whites nation-wide.
There is no racial or ethnic group with such disproportionate job rates in Canada.
If you think Al Sharpton is talking black people out of all those jobs than you're just impervious to reason and incapable of changing your mind.
Blacks embrace a culture pretty much devoid of a work ethic. This wasn't always the case. Quite the opposite was true 50 years ago.
We have to ask ourselves what happened in the last 50 years to change this so drastically.
I'll suggest the answer can be found in the soft bigotry of liberals low expectations of blacks and their abilities.
Sometimes the best help you can offer someone is to make sure you don't offer them handicapping forms of help. Which is exactly whats happened over the last 50 years and liberals refuse to see it.
SteveH
CP: You've pointed to failure ans spouted some liberal generalities but you've failed show how it is caused by unfairness or inequality.
You've made a huge unsubstantiated claim. I think you need to write an article on this and invite us to your blog to critique.
Steve is closer to the mark than you are. All I would change about what he said is that there are whites in the same category. The common failure factor is that they all look to government and the democratic party to help them.
I don't think that unqualified people should be hired for jobs that if done improperly can be a serious safety hazard, but I do think that since there are not a lot of black doctors in California, if a black student is a 10th of a percentile away from the grade of a white student, perhaps they should be given preference as candidates for Berkley's medical school. That doesn't mean they'll become less qualified doctors.
Also, I don't disagree with Cosby either. That's certainly part of it, but to suggest that somehow helping is a means of disabling a people, although counter-intuitive and contrarian (which I know you conservatives like), also doesn't match up with reality one bit.
For instance, aboriginals in Canada have been getting special treatment ever since the era of residential schools ended (google it). They receive free land, pay less if not no taxes, etc... And aboriginals in Canada are in fact doing better than those in America.
Many of them take what the gov't gives them to stay afloat, and many of them, especially the children of those who are just getting by, turn down gov't aid and make it on their own.
And just because you were able to achieve the 'American Dream' without any help, does not mean that everyone is like you. Some people thrive off of adversity. Others would rather have a little bit of help to start, and then will continue on their own.
N.B.
I'm not suggesting that Pilots be allowed to fly planes high. I'm only suggesting that instead of gangsters selling drugs and making a ton of money off it, private (taxed) businesses sell the same drugs (except assure it is safe, not laced, etc...) and the gangsters be forced to move to making money off something else.
The same goes for prostitution.
What unsubstantiated claim Silverfiddle? Unemployment is higher for blacks than whites, and I quoted the article you gave me the link to for the education bit.
What's the cause of high unemployment? What's the cause of high incarceration?
Your unsubstantiated claim is that they are caused by unfairness and inequality but you have provided no evidence.
But of course, a Canadian businessman is more of an expert on the black experience in America than an actual black American.
Well, either black people are innately less employable and innately more likely to commit crimes, and innately uneducateable, or the cause of high unemployment, high incarceration rates and bad schools in black neighbourhoods is something else.
I don't know how much blame can be laid at the hands of a couple political activists like Sharpton and Jackson.
All of this has a lot to do with poverty. Were black people given a helping hand up (not a hand down) towards employment after slavery? or were they still treated like second class citizens well after slavery?
When an employeer looks at a black candidate for a position and white candidate for the same position with the same qualifications, which candidate is most likely to get the job (even at our present date and time)?
I'm curious as to what Plenty thinks about this. If his cousin who was living in the inner-cities went to school worked part-time and full-time during the summers, still managed to get good grades and was .5% away from qualifying for a scholarship or bursary for post-secondary without which he could not afford to attend, would he be for denying him the preferential treatment?
(not a hand out)* not 'down'
First paragraph: False dilemma.
2nd Para: Jackson and Sharpton aren't to blame; they just make money off of the situation
3rd: Good question. Based on social and economic benchmarks, black people were better off after the civil war than they are now, but based on social equality and civil rights they were worse off back then.
4th Question: HA! I can't believe you asked that question after the 2008 election. We had an experienced, eminently qualified 72 year old white man -vs- a handsome, stylish, callow, inexperienced black man whose only accomplishments were community activism and writing two books about himself. There's your answer.
You keep mentioning this theoretical black person that is just .5% away from success. What about the poor white person who is just a hairs breadth away?
Life is never that clear cut.
Liberalism says "It's not your fault you're fat, or you use drugs, or you have five kids you can't care for, or you're stupid and unemployed.
Conservatism says get off your ass and take care of yourself.
Go watch The Pursuit of Happyness.
http://www.chrisgardnermedia.com/main/book.htm
Some of us start out in the hole and others start out on a mountaintop; but just because you started there doesn't mean you have to finish there. Like Chris Gardner says: "Start where you are."
BTW, You really seem to have an unhealthy racial fixation that borders on stereotyping and condescension. I think you need to include more people of color in your social circle.
I've seen it. And, there really aren't many black people in Vancouver. I don't know why, but that's what it is.
The white person who is just a hairs breadth away has no historical desert to preferential treatment.
I never said that life is clear cut, all I am saying is that in some cases, such as with dealing out scholarships, etc... perhaps there should be preferential treatment to blacks.
Do you really think that black students would be attending post-secondary institutions at a higher rate if they had no preferential treatment? That's what you seem to be suggesting.
The gov't can't change black 'defeatist' culture, but it can make amends to a people who have been historically undermined in America.
The democratic party was going to win that election no matter who they put up as their front-person. They could have had Sarah Palins pregnant daughter run against McCain and they still would've won.
"Black people were better off after the civil war than they are now." So you're actually suggesting that back when they were treated like second class citizens they were better off, as if you think that that was the cause of them thriving relative to now?
There could have been hundred of other factors that helped that happen. To suggest that being treated poorly was the lead cause, and not something they were simply able to rise above is truly amazing.
How do you determine who "deserves" something?
To repeat what I said:
"Based on social and economic benchmarks, black people were better off after the civil war than they are now, but based on social equality and civil rights they were worse off back then."
Your taking me out of context is getting tiresome. I'm beginning to think you do it on purpose because your argument is so weak.
So you think black people need special help? That presupposes they are less capable than whites, which is a racist, bigoted belief.
I know blacks and other minorities are just as capable as anyone else, or to state it more accurately, race does not determine one's abilities.
The US military is the world's greatest meritocracy. You earn everything you get, and minorities do great there.
You really need to critically analyze the lefty victimhood propaganda instead of just ingesting and regurgitating it.
Theory is great, but the real world often tells a different story. I'm not putting you down, but it is obvious you lack the experience or knowledge base to discuss this issue intelligently.
Black people in America have greater obstacles and barriers to success than white people. That doesn't suppose they are less capable of overcoming them.
Not everyone can serve in the military. It is not propaganda to recognize that a race of ethnicity has been historically victimized. Would you have the same qualms if I said that jewish were victims in Germany?
And also, how am I taking you out of context? You said I was but never explained it. If black people were economically better off when they had less rights, then you must be suggesting that giving them less rights and less respect will increase their chances of success.
I think that after a group of people overcome slavery and attain civil rights, they deserve something then, other than what everyone else is getting.
It's not a level playing field if your family were all slaves up until you were born.
How about reparations? Or do you think they don't 'deserve' those either.
Of course I'm against reparations. If there are any living slaves, then perhaps we could make the slave-holder pay them something.
My family never owned slaves. Half were itinerant dirt farmers in the South-East and the other half were living in Eastern Europe at the time.
You've got a lot of thorny issues to work out. Would you take money from me, who makes under 100K/year and give it to a black man who is a doctor or millionaire CEO?
How do you determine if a black person is a slave descendant? For example, President Obama and Colin Powell are not. Would people like them still get reparations?
My point about the military was that it is a proving ground showing no race or gender is better than another.
You're in over your head. It is obvious you have no real-world experience in a mixed race society. Think before regurgitating what you read. Your half-baked ideas need to go back in the oven.
I hope oyu understand that the last two paragraphs of your previous 2 to 3 replies have be ad hominum, and you keep refering to 'experience' as if I have to have lived in the ghetto to understand what needs to be done to solve the problem.
Just because it's not clear exactly who should get reparation does not mean that nobody should get them. The world is not black and white, and I'm not arguing that it is. Just because the line between organism and human is not precises does not mean abortion is wrong, and just because there are black people who were not slaves does not mean that no black people were, and that they do not deserve reparations.
If you family were slaves every generation before yours, you wouldn't feel like that was a disadvantage? The fact is that wealth does not disappear with the person. It lives on in their children, grandchildren, etc... The fact that some Americans made money off of the free labour of blacks (in the past) does garner the black descendents merit in asing for compensation.
It's not that they were done an injustice themselves, but economically, well, I assume their grandparents would have made more money had they not been slaves.
Although blacks have a lot of responsibility for their current economic position within America, the combination of persistent racism (even now) and their historical repression in America combines to build a strong case for affirmative action.
And although white people may be just as disadvantaged, that is another issue on to itself. Whites were never kept as slaves (in America) in mass amounts, and they were never treated like second class citizens in America.
And the argument that helping people somehow hurts them is just boneheaded. It may be that some policies towards blacks have indeed done this, but that is not to say that there is no such thing a genuine help that will help lead the people who were helped to some greater level of prosperity.
This is no way disolves the responsibility blacks have for their own current position in America. It is simply to say that although they hold a certain level of responsibility, so do the people who preciously enslaved them for hundreds of years.
"This is no way disolves the responsibility blacks have for their own current position in America."
I agree with that.
My criticism of you is not a misguided attempt to win the argument, but to point out to you that perhaps some of your basic assumptions are not correct.
I know people like you from more enlightened countries imagine the USA as a bigoted, chauvinist house of horrors, but if you visited you'd be pleasantly surprised to find out we don't quite fit the stereotype.
Now, you are a thinking man, so I pose this to you. Pick the absolute best African country you can think of. Next, compare the state of black people in that country against the state of blacks in the US. Slavery was a historical wrong, but ask your average black American where they would rather be today, and while your at it, ask the average person from that African country where they'd rather be.
Life is not fair. I grew up in a blue collar home and couldn't afford college. I hold no resentment towards those who got the full boat. I have no guilt for slavery since neither I nor my ancestors participated in it.
If you feel guilty, come on down and start handing out money. I'm sure you'd get popular real quick.
Nike pays the chinese pennys for their work, but there is no other place for them to work; this fact somehow excuses Nike?
Life is not fair; I couldn't agree more. It is inherently unfair. Some people are born looking like Brad Pitt and others have serious deformities. This however, in no way excuses unfair treatment of black in America.
I don't feel guilty about French, Native, Black or any other minority of people. I'm a minority myself. Even in our own country my father couldn't teach because he was not muslim and wouldn't convert.
Do I want something from Iran, other than for them to reverse these policies and others that victimize women? Not really; but would it be nice for myself and children of others whose ancestors were held back for their differences be given some sort of a break in some form if we should choose to accept it?
I may very well not take a scholarship if I am not the very best candidate, but do I think it would be a nice gesture for Iran to show me the respect of recognizing their debt to me in a real, significant way (and of course nothing says I'm sorry like a free education)?
It would be nice. I think that's how the majority of blacks feel about this issue. Not giving them anything at all is just another slap in the face.
And again, this is not unprecedented. See what you get in Germany as a Jew, and in Canada as a card carrying aboriginal person.
"And again, this is not unprecedented. See what you get in Germany as a Jew, and in Canada as a card carrying aboriginal person."
True. My grandparents were eligible for reparations but nobody in the family wanted to grab for free money. So Germany's got a few thousand extra in the coffers...
And a minority of aboriginals actually take advantage of the taxes they don't have to pay with their cards, but you should give blacks, like your grandparents the oppurtunity to turn down the money.
If you went out for dinner with someone you accidentally or purposely harmed in some way, wouldn't you at least offer or even insist on paying.
Affirmative action, reparations and all of this is just that same gesture on a larger scale.
CP, it's obvious that you have no concept whatsoever of what it's like to be a minority. However, if you do happen to be one, and I sincerely doubt it, then you have a lot a soul searching to do. I can't fathom the idea that you can honestly believe that all minorities need a helping hand because their ancestors were down trodden for whatever reason.
What makes you think that any minority, let's not just limit it to blacks (after all, you brought in the aboriginals, didn't you), needs, or actually wants, a helping hand because they're too ineffective on their own? You should also think about other people who are in the same living conditions, areas, economic status, etc. when you make such a proposal.
I find it amazing that you can't see through your own smoke when you make statements like you've made concerning minorities, and obviously, blacks in particular. Where do you get the ignorant idea that we are a people who can't make it on our own and need some type of assistance to do so? For me, statements like that immediately mark you as the racist, or at the very least, a bigot.
I'm sure you will disagree with me and more than likely picture yourself as some holier than thou type who simply wants to help. Well sir, as a self-appointed spokesperson of the Black Community, let me just say please shut up and go find a tree to hug. We don't need, or want, your type of help. It only further propagates the racist concepts that minorities need help since we are inferior to the typical, Anglo-Saxon, white male. In case you haven't heard, that has long since been proven wrong on a magnitudinal order.
Now, what I suggest you do after reading this, is to look around you and open your eyes. But this time, instead of seeing what is going on, try to pay attention and realize the bigger truth that has been hidden from you in so many ways. I've met many people like you, blacks included, who believe that we should just wait for the handout to come. The problem is, that the time spent waiting for that handout is nothing more than that, time spent doing nothing else.
If you truly want to help everyone who is in a bad situation, then do so for everyone. At least that way, you won't be immediately singled out as a racist bigot, but I'm sure you eventually will be, since you obviously can't keep your mouth shut for too long.
I'm not suggesting that blacks or other minorities have trouble finding work or continuing their education past highschool. Every statistic ever collected shows that to be a fact (with every minority except maybe Asian).
I am an Iranian-Canadian. Both my parents were Iranian, and on top of that Zoroastrian. After serving in the military (4 years), and just after the mullahs took over Iran my father was denied the right to teach (farsi) in the country he served (for VERY little pay).
Do I need help from Iran or Canada? Not really. My dad managed to suck it up and give up his dream job for a job that put food on the table, and he has put me in a fantastic economic position.
Like I said to Silverfiddle. I'm not suggesting that all, or even most minorities need help, only that it should be offered as a gesture, if only as a gesture.
You don't have to apply for black only scholarships. But what your doing is denying the United States a chance to apologize in a real, meaningful way, you're denying blacks that grew up in poor economic circumstances (which far outnumber whites) the right to a hand up, and you're denying yourself and so many others like you the oppurtunity to say "thanks but no thanks, I can make it on my own".
You're not afterall a politician. You don't have much say on this matter. Without affirmative action, the State is denying you something; you're not turning it down.
If help was mandated I would understand your objection, but it isn't.
CP, after reviewing your profile, and blog. I can now definitely classify you as one who does nothing more than propagate the typical racial stereotypes. If this isn't so, explain the video at this link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7AvhBZtciIk, I got it from your blog...
Granted, you weren't (I assume) one of the hosts from the show, but for me, simply having a link to it on your blog, with no retort as to the obvious stupidity and condemnation of a people speaks volumes.
Ricky Gervais and Steven Merchant wrote the original "Office". It's a joke. Its meant to be racist... AS A JOKE! And I thought it was funny, so I posted it.
I'm not a host of the show. I assume my readers understand irony, humour, sarcasm and satire, so I posted it without a detailed explanation as to why it is not racist.
Get pack to affirmative action. Why shouldn't you be allowed to turn down help, and why shouldn't blacks who are less unfortunate than you (and statistically unfortunate compared to the general population) be denied such help?
I'm not denying that over the next 50 to 100 years poverty rates will more or less be indiscriminable across racial lines, but to help speed this process up is racist how?
Oops... I accidentally wrote "pack" instead of "back". I hope you don't accuse me of being racist against Pakistani people.
C'mon Plenty! Lay off of CP. He's not a bigot. He just enjoys chauvinistic mockery of other cultures and thinks you can't make it without my money because you're black.
CP, you say it was humor, but it simply didn't seem that way to me, especially since there was nothing listed anywhere to say so, either in your blog or where the video is actually hosted. Regardless, you may now understand that it is very easy for someone to make a mistake simply based on a quick observation. Sound familiar?
Silverfiddle, maybe you're right, I should probably lay off of him, but it's just irritating when I hear someone, anyone, make the claims he does and think they're justified in doing so.
CP, as for your mispelling a word (or more), I don't honestly care if you do so or not. I'm reading what you write and, hopefully, trying to understand your intentions and meaning. Believe it or not, I do read what you write and give it some good thought before posting to make sure I'm not providing a knee jerk reaction to it.
Now, as you say, back to affirmative action. As for being allowed to turn it down, how would I get that choice? After all, I technically wouldn't know when it was being applied or not, would I? How am I supposed to know that I was initially hired based on my merit, or simply because I'm black? Regardless, I prefer to be a self-made man and not someone who succeeds by hanging on to the coat tails of others.
Plenty: Fair enough. I don't live in the US, but in Canada, certain jobs, ie. police officer, firefighter, etc... are looking for people that would more accurately represent the general population of the community.
For instance, there may be a largely hispanic neighbourhood, and only one hispanic cop on the force. It seems that in this case if a hispanic person is looking to become a police officer, but there is a white person just as qualified who handed in his resume a week earlier, preference should still be given to the hispanic candidate.
In Canada you can see this right on the RCMP recruiting website. Minorities, women, etc... are given some preference, mainly just because there aren't many of them on the force. Right now there aren't many people trying to become cops, so just about everybody who passes the lie detector test is sent to training, but the point still remains.
In the RCMP case, you can just skip checking the box that says you're a visible minority.
Also, the fact is that preferential discrimination is not the biggest problem for minorities world-wide. Turks in Germany are not overwhelmed by their post-secondary oppurtunities, and the same goes for blacks in America.
If only to help try and reverse some of the negative discrimination of blacks, affirmative action should be put into place.
CP, I understand what you're trying to say, but in the end what you're actually doing is placing Euro-centric ideals and values upon American society and there will probably never be a one-to-one relationship there. I could probably go so far as to say the same is true for comparing Canada to Europeans, although that's a much closer relationship.
In the end, never try to force your values, etc. upon someone else. It never truly works out and in the end everyone becomes bitter. Not that I am, far from it in fact, but I'm just trying to say that you should recognize your audience and your differences from them before you jump on a soapbox.
Your heart may be in the right place, but you should choose your words carefully, some may not be as lenient, nor at such a distance.
The US is not the same as Europe or Canada, in exactly the worse ways. Treatment of poor people (across racial/ethnic lines), treatment of minorities, etc...
Forget about gay-marriage, abortion and other 3rd rails. Lets look where it really counts: Providing health care to poor people (and middle-class people), providing minorities with equal oppurtunities to jobs and schooling, providing poor people with those same oppurtunities, not overextending ourselves overseas (remember Canada went into Afghanistan and not Iraq), etc...
Canada and Europe are not even comparable to the States. And lets look at the third rails. Gays are given equal rights in Canada, women are deemed compotent in their own moral decision making (abortion), drug laws are much more lenient, violent crime rates are lower, poverty is lower (even if unemployment is still higher)...
I mean, I could go on and on.
Also, I'm not going to parce my words. If someone can't take/understand a joke they can read a different blog.
The only thing the US beats Canada and Europe in is economic growth, but the rest of us decided a long time ago that economic stability, and less poverty are more valuable than growth with no stability (boom and bust).
Medical care? Last time I checked, and it was NOT that long ago, medical care elsewhere isn't quite up to the same standards as we have here. Don't misquote me here, what I'm simply saying is that there is no signup list for operations to take place due to lack of bed space or doctors. Our medical care may not be free, but it is available to all, you may want to check your sources. Regardless, no matter where you go, other countries included, you will find mistreatment and the turning away of patients, don't pretend it doesn't happen elsewhere.
Personally, I think it's an individual's right to decide what they want to do with their body, as for sexual preferences, to each his own. You're trying to force everyone in our country to fit into some immoral standard that has apparently been created through some form or another.
Everywhere you go you will find good, and bad, people of one type or another. Trying to lump everyone together into one stereotype is, well..., you know the word.
What you have again tried to do is force your country's morals upon ours, and that my friend just will not do. That's like us telling your country that everyone should speak French and you have no choice but to like it. You are free to come and go as you like in your country, but I'm sure there may be some locations where that is not quite the case. We all know that ignorance will always survive in one form or another and the only way to prevent it's spread is to drop the bonds of that ignorance and look to the future, of course, while remembering the past, lest we repeat it.
As for the joke in your blog, I said earlier that I did not know it was such and it was a misunderstanding. I then pointed out that you could then see how such a misunderstanding can come about when one doesn't know the history, or reason for what he/she may be witnessing (this was implied, figured you'd catch that part). That is exactly what you're doing by continually posting the same drivel over and over again; you simply made an observation, jumped to conclusions based on some facts presented by others who had no background in the issue, and then chose to speak on the topic at hand.
Look, you have your opinion and we have ours, let's let it end at that. The one thing that a wise person notices is an impasse, and that's what we have. I have the background and experience in the matter, simply by being one of the so-called unfortunate and also by growing up here. On the other hand, you have some statistics and facts that have been presented to you through some means. If this were a case study, which of those would be the best choice for an argumental basis?
Economic growth? Is that all? Look a little deeper my friend, I believe there's a lot you may want to check out before making that kind of statement. You're speaking from a single point of view and commenting on something that was not even within the context of the conversation.
I guess in the end we can simply agree to disagree.
Enjoy your liberalism. BTW, believe it or not, I'm NOT Republican...
CP: Europe beats the US when it comes to treatment of minorities?
You don't know what you're talking about. There is no class mobility in Europe. I know Africans who lived in Europe and the now US, and they would tell you you're full of it.
Europe is a racist continent. Oh sure, they'll sip a beer at an outdoor cafe with a pigment enhanced person, but you just don't see the intermingling like in the US.
Silverfiddle: My father was able to move up economically in Europe, and just within his circle of friends, almost all of them 'made it'. My grandfather was a builder in the States and one of his biggest projects was mercilessly foreclosed upon.
Plenty: The reason health care has been slow here is because the conservatives have underfunded hospitals. Skandanavia is a better example of universal health care at its best.
How the fuck are you not a Republican. You've argued against helping the most vulnerable people in your ethnic community and defending a health care system that leaves people to fend for themselves for this that or the other arbitrary reason.
Also, how is the standard of minimizing suffering immoral?
I agree to disagree because you have a hard-head. My position on the issue is clearly superior to yours.
CP, I've tried to keep this at the scholarly level but you are obviously too shallow to do so. Anyone who resorts to such emphasis is not worthy of any discussion with me. And yes, I am in fact NOT a Republican. Again you have labeled everyone in a certain group to behave a certain way and say certain things. Our country is not bound to class idiocy that you are obviously tied to.
Regardless, I know you will definitely say something back to me about this, but I really don't care. I refuse to carry a conversation with someone who has to resort to childish behaviour that is obvious at your young, and tender age. You will note that at no time in the entire thread did I stoop to such a level as to use the same type of language to emphasize such a simple point.
BTW, simply stating something doesn't make it so. Once again, I live here and have grown up here, you have no sound basis for anything during the entire discussion.
Next time, try to conduct yourself as a grown man, and maybe, just maybe, we can have an intellectual conversation.
Sorry grandma, I used a swear. How many hail mary's is that?
Just because someone doesn't have first hand experience does not mean that they can't mount a serious argument against someone who does.
You can look back at this and if you read my posts you'll see that you hadn't even attempting to retort any of my strongest arguments.
Arguing that I shouldn't force my countries morals on the US is a crock argument, because of course, if I can explain why some policies are more moral than others I should promogate them all around the world.
You have yet to explain why they're immoral as well. And I don't know of a singl documented case of someone being turned away from a hospital for care in Canada. As opposed to the US where I personally know people who have stories about people having to call friends and family to give them money to pay for their stitches, etc...
"Once again, I live here and have grown up here, you have no sound basis for anything during the entire discussion."
That's not a good argument. If Canada started bombing Mexico for no reason and I was defending it to you by saying, "I live here. You have no basis for anything in this discussion." You'd think me a moron; legitimately. You seem to think of me as a racist bigot, because I think that disadvantaged minorites deserve to be offered help, but have no logical basis for that accussation, especially since YOU'RE ARGUING THEY SHOULD GET NOTHING and struggle out of their situation despite their disadvantages.
Life is unfair; but conservative policies only emphasize that fact.
CP: You've actually been trying to mount an argument?
You have no argument. All you've done is said you feel that black people should get money taken from white people.
You showed no nexus between slavery 150 years ago and the plight of certain blacks today.
You also failed to show how this transfer of wealth would help anything.
CP Said this:
"Just because someone doesn't have first hand experience does not mean that they can't mount a serious argument against someone who does."
This is the thinking that gets us into trouble. "I don't know anything about this, but I'm going to shoot off my mouth anyway."
You have no firsthand experience and your "argument," so called, is definitely not serious.
Your argument reminds me of a dog standing on his hind legs: amusing, but not very effective.
It's not really about slavery, but racism that persists today, that may have something to do with slavery and segregation. It was not long ago when blacks had trouble finding a place to eat, and in certain places in the States I've heard that they still have the same problem, albeit, to a much less severe extent.
With the substantially higher unemployment rates, substantially worse schools in black neighbourhoods, I think that like Germany, Canada and so many other countries offering a hand up to historically down-trodden group of people would not be totally .out of line. To say that some sort of self-depricating culture is the entire cause of this, which seems to be your argument is just non-sensical.
I'm not black in America, but I have an imagination. I understand what it's like to feel as if the system is working against you, and I just think as a matter of decency (not a word you like) an offer (that could be turned down) should be made to blacks, actually native people in America as well, now that I think of it.
Again, you haven't actually argued against my argument, but only a characature you made of it (straw-man fallacy). And at the end you literally made a characiture of it.
CP, I know I said I was done but just where have you heard that it's still hard for a black person to find someplace to eat? Please provide location, or at least more info. That really intrigues me as I'm from the south and although things weren't great when I grew up, I don't recall having any problems when I was back home last year...
BTW, when I say no to providing a helping hand, I'm simply saying no to a certain sect of people. Who's to say that in another 150 years things may be the other way around for whatever reason or another. Should we then turn the other cheek and provide those same services to whomever was downtrodden? My point is to simply make it completely fair and give all those less fortunate the same help.
If you want to advocate reparations payments, where would it stop? After all, how many blacks in this country are actually descendants of true slaves and truly need the help you mention? Does it also go to those who are making the six-figure salaries? In your world, I guess not, but "to make it fair" it should since some of them are more than likely slave descendants as well.
Lastly, you're right about one thing. You do have an imagination and are using it deftly. :)
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.