“And further, they are in no way obligated to denounce the black mobs or the racialist leaders just to prove that not all black people are like that.”
I’m so glad you mentioned that since, then, conversely, I would not be obligted to denounce white racist groups just to prove that not all white groups are like that. Sounds a little silly, right? But , isn’t that what you are saying?
“then, conversely, I would not be obligted to denounce white racist groups just to prove that not all white groups are like that.”
If you are part of a group that happens to be all white it is still just a group of people unless being white is a criterion for membership or participation. So, no, you are not obligated to denounce white racist groups to prove that not all white PEOPLE are like that. But perhaps that is what you meant. If by “white group” you mean that being white is a requirement to be part of the group, then it is racist by definition (which incidentally makes something like a scholarship exclusively for blacks racist).
“But , isn’t that what you are saying?”
No. How did you infer that from any of my comments?
Our conversation began when you responded to my response to beandog in #176. In #179 you quoted beandog’s quote but may have thought it was from me. I’m not sure. Either way I don’t see what I said that could have given you that impression.