Posted on 04/01/2015 4:48:07 AM PDT by RoosterRedux
Let’s start simple. Airing out differences on emotionally laden subjects (and yakking about race guarantees high blood pressure) is not always advisable. Actually, lots of harm can happen from ill-advised frankness. Those in happy marriage know that it would be unwise to turn their 25th wedding anniversary into a two hour tête-à-tête about each other’s annoying personal hygiene habits or spousal sexual ineptitude.
A frank discussion about race relations would be far worse. I can readily see a white person working himself up into a lather when recounting the sky-high black crime rate, the awful academic performance of blacks despite trillions in government help, the relative level of dependence on government handouts and the absolute lack of any gratitude for this assistance. To which an agitated black would respond with a similarly lengthy catalogue: the legacy of slavery and discrimination, innumerable incidents of police brutality, white denial of their pernicious racism and related sins that undermine black self-respect. And this would be only round one of a 15 round championship fight.
That every one of these items has been discussed ad nauseam for half a century suggests that the purpose of this dialogue is not to provide new information or to clear the air as one might spit out a spouse’s long annoying faulty hygiene in couples therapy. Nor could it be argued that contemporary Americans need a refresher course on race -- almost every item in these prospective conversations spontaneously surfaces with once-a-month regularity thanks to the mass media’s infatuation with racially charged white-on-black violence (but not the reverse).
Why then the repeated calls and the unwillingness of whites to engage African Americans? Here’s why: nearly all whites (and many Asians, too) know that the invitation is a trap, a disguised ploy to advance the racial egalitarian agenda.
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
Bad people don’t like to face up to the truth about themselves or be held accountable. Been investigating them for over 20 years. I could do it for 50 more years and come to the same conclusion. People will always be the same, good and bad and varying shades between. Race really isn’t the main issue; its a good vs evil thing. Unfortunately there are some demographics that are consistently more evil than others but they want to blame poverty and others for their bad behavior. Until they change their behavior I don’t advise discussing “race” with them unless you want a black eye or worse.
There is no “conversation on race”. The blacks I’ve seen interviewed quickly resort to filabuster response, shouting, anger, name-calling, liberal talking points, and eventually...violence.
Many have been completely brainwashed against whites since early childhood.
Of course, those responses are the same if you try to ignore them...take the case of the black guys who attacked the white guy on the subway because he didn’t want to discuss michael brown.
My wife sells floor covering as she has gone to measure for carpet at black homes. Their opening question is not about carpet, but something like, “What do you think about obama?” Trying to pick a fight.
When black libs like Melissa Harris Perry call for a FRANK discussion on race, then mean having guilty whites apologize for things we didn't do, jus tas white liberals do.
Take poor children in single mom families, we whites must say that its our fault not theirs, its slavery, Jim Crowe and white privileged that is causing that not behavior.
Anything else is deemed racist and unacceptable hate speech.
If someone wants to whine about their poverty situation...the simple escape is to join the military...ditch your previous life...get a free education while in the military...and never look back. We can keep this conversation on race simple and short....it’s all about escape. Talking doesn’t change anyone’s life...action does.
10. “Divide and govern” is a maxim consecrated by the experience of ages, and should be familiar in its use to every politician as the knife he carries in his pocket. In the work here to be executed, the best effects may be produced by this maxim, and with peculiar facility. An extensive republic made up of lesser republics necessarily contains various sorts of people, distinguished by local and other interests and prejudices. Let the whole group be well examined in all its parts and relations, geographical and political, metaphysical and metaphorical; let there be first a northern and a southern section, by a line running east and west, and then an eastern and western section, by a line running north and south. By a suitable nomenclature, the landholders cultivating different articles can be discriminated from one another, all from the class of merchants, and both from that of manufacturers.
One of the subordinate republics may be represented as a commercial state, another as a navigation state, another as a manufacturing state, others as agricultural states; and although the great body of people in each be really agricultural, and the other characters be more or less common to all, still it will be politic to take advantage of such an arrangement. Should the members of the great republic be of different sizes, and subject to little jealousies on that account, another important division will be ready formed to your hand. Add again the division that may be carved out of personal interests, political opinions, and local parties. With so convenient an assortment of votes, especially with the help of the marked ones, a majority may be packed for any question with as much ease as the odd trick by an adroit gamester, and any measure whatever carried or defeated, as the great revolution to be brought about may require.
It is only necessary, therefore, to recommend that full use be made of the resource; and to remark that, besides the direct benefit to be drawn from these artificial divisions, they will tend to smother the true and natural one, existing in all societies, between the few who are always impatient of political equality and the many who can never rise above it; between those who are to mount to the prerogatives and those who are to be saddled with the burdens of the hereditary government to be introduced - in one word, between the general mass of the people, attached to their republican government and republican interests, and the chosen band devoted to monarchy and Mammon. It is of infinite importance that this distinction should be kept out of sight. The success of the project absolutely requires it.
/”Rules for Changing a Limited Republican Government” 1784-1796; Freneau
I welcome an honest conversation about race relations. As long as it includes conversations about:
black on white violence,
black on black violence,
The failure of gangster culture,
The moral problems of daddy-less “families”
and why content of character is now less important than skin color
white denial of their pernicious racism
Since one can’t prove a negative, one can’t deny one is a racist. It’s a neat parlor trick.
No one need be told they are in control groups, not even the teachers. Each class would be totally independent and exist in different institutions, with no mention of the group being separate but equal.
Everybody seems to have missed the obvious precedent for the “Honest Discussion About Race.”
Today is Festivus, and it’s time for the Airing of Grievances!
What most blacks - and Big Media - mean by “an honest discussion of race” will be a one-sided diatribe about how all whites are racist and evil and all blacks are innocent victims, and no mention of white concerns are allowed to be raised.
That’s not an honest discussion, that’s a lecture. And most whites are smart enough to avoid it.
“My wife sells floor covering as she has gone to measure for carpet at black homes. Their opening question is not about carpet, but something like, “What do you think about obama?” Trying to pick a fight.”
For the same reason Laura Ingraham’s book “Shut up and sing” had that title, I think the proper response would be “I’m in business to discuss floor covering” or “I don’t have time to follow politics much, my business keeps me too busy”.
Discussions about race, unless part of advise on how i can avoid getting the living stuffing beat out of me for stumbling into the wrong part of an unfamiliar town, bores the crap out of me.
as long as white people can be permanently smeared and ruined if they utter the wrong word, there will be no ‘free and open discussion about race’... and we all know it
I have negotiated and mediated high conflict custody situations for decades. The parents always want to start off trying to prove that the other parent is flawed and evil. The job of the mediator is to keep the parents focused on the present and the future and not let the parents drift back to past wounds and griefs and sorrows. So I see this whole race relations thing as one parent picking at a scab, even at a scar and trying to use it to justify present bad behavior while the other parent is trying to use present bad behavior as a reason to marginalize the other parent in the present and future. Each person involved has to look at him or herself and realize that the only person each of us can change is ourselves.
Bookmark
Just as in Ferguson, the facts are changed to fit the narrative because the narrative is more important than the TRUTH.
I knew a black man who did this. He joined the navy, worked on Nuke subs, and when he got out traveled the world as a high paid power plant start up specialist. He earned the respect of all of us in the power plants.
He also made three times the salary I did.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.