Well you do have a black president: do you think that would've happened last century? And I'm sure the black people in the south who had to fight so hard for a vote appreciate their civil rights. To suggest that any poor people are content with poverty indicates your own blinkered privileged position.
Civil Rights were only the start: equality takes a long time to achieve, especially in a country with an economy built on slavery of blacks and genocide and dispossession of the original owners.
Slavery exists right now in many African countries at far greater numbers than ever did in America. It hasn't and doesn't help those countries, does it?
Privilege is earned, not given away. When you give it away as politically correct people wish to do, privilege loses its stature.
Blacks exist in America living a desegregationist's dream. They have every opportunity, especially considering "affirmative action". They still refuse to assimilate.
Why would they want to assimilate with the likes of you? Assimilation can be another form of genocide because it leads to loss of culture and identity: why don't you try it? Strange isn't it, no-one ever suggests white people should assimilate with other cultures, presumably because ethnocentric people assume their culture is the best on earth.
People in the countries you mention were all colonised by white powers for centuries: they'll work it out when they can. If their riches hadn't been plundered and still are they'd all be in a much better position.
Who's talking about privilege? The issue was civil RIGHTS not privilege - more comprehension problems?
Your history is so off its barely worth debating. Black tribes sold other tribes that were conquered into bondage. White explorers didn't "conquer" or "colonize" anything in Africa, other than South Africa, which Dutch settlers set up, and as coincidence would have it is a highly functioning society.
They'd be in a good position if they had organizational skills, which as a whole they seem to lack. Sure outliers exist, but no culture takes on the characteristics of its outliers.
You discredit yourself in your first sentence. America is a white society, created, organized and founded by white men. Asians have no problem assimilating, why is it that blacks seem to? And it's not assumption about a culture being successful when it's economically proven to be.
So the former Rhodesia wasn't colonised by the British and the former Belgian Congo by the Belgians etc etc etc? South Africa functioned well for white people during Apartheid, that's true.
So no culture takes on anything from its "outliers"? For a start, if the colonised peoples knew the term they'd use it to describe their invaders. Secondly, ever checked out how much of USA culture came from the Native Americans and from "outlier" immigrant groups? Food is an obvious example.
I know in my country, whether most white people know it or not, some aspects of Aboriginal culture have been taken on and in my opinion, it's unfortunate and white culture is the poorer because that's not more widespread. In this country there's been considerable blending of cultures and we're all the richer for it.
I didn't respond to your comment about Asians assimilating into US society (USA is NOT America, by the way, that's another example of your ethnocentricity, it's only PART of America): ever occurred to you that this could well be because their skin colour is closer to white than that of black people and that this could make assimilation easier for them? Also, they weren't enslaved by white people for generations and bought and sold like cattle.
I got a serious problem. But it's normal, yes?
↑ View this comment's parent
← View full post
Well you do have a black president: do you think that would've happened last century? And I'm sure the black people in the south who had to fight so hard for a vote appreciate their civil rights. To suggest that any poor people are content with poverty indicates your own blinkered privileged position.
Civil Rights were only the start: equality takes a long time to achieve, especially in a country with an economy built on slavery of blacks and genocide and dispossession of the original owners.
--
Captain_Flatulitis
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Slavery exists right now in many African countries at far greater numbers than ever did in America. It hasn't and doesn't help those countries, does it?
Privilege is earned, not given away. When you give it away as politically correct people wish to do, privilege loses its stature.
Blacks exist in America living a desegregationist's dream. They have every opportunity, especially considering "affirmative action". They still refuse to assimilate.
--
Ellenna
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
0
0
Why would they want to assimilate with the likes of you? Assimilation can be another form of genocide because it leads to loss of culture and identity: why don't you try it? Strange isn't it, no-one ever suggests white people should assimilate with other cultures, presumably because ethnocentric people assume their culture is the best on earth.
People in the countries you mention were all colonised by white powers for centuries: they'll work it out when they can. If their riches hadn't been plundered and still are they'd all be in a much better position.
Who's talking about privilege? The issue was civil RIGHTS not privilege - more comprehension problems?
--
Captain_Flatulitis
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Your history is so off its barely worth debating. Black tribes sold other tribes that were conquered into bondage. White explorers didn't "conquer" or "colonize" anything in Africa, other than South Africa, which Dutch settlers set up, and as coincidence would have it is a highly functioning society.
They'd be in a good position if they had organizational skills, which as a whole they seem to lack. Sure outliers exist, but no culture takes on the characteristics of its outliers.
You discredit yourself in your first sentence. America is a white society, created, organized and founded by white men. Asians have no problem assimilating, why is it that blacks seem to? And it's not assumption about a culture being successful when it's economically proven to be.
--
Ellenna
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
So the former Rhodesia wasn't colonised by the British and the former Belgian Congo by the Belgians etc etc etc? South Africa functioned well for white people during Apartheid, that's true.
WTF is an outlier?
--
Captain_Flatulitis
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
Yes, Rhodesia was. Now it no longer exists because the white man was driven out. And the jobs and economic prosperity left as well.
Outlier is a statistical term.
--
Ellenna
7 years ago
|
pl
Comment Hidden (
show
)
Report
1
1
See More Comments =>
So no culture takes on anything from its "outliers"? For a start, if the colonised peoples knew the term they'd use it to describe their invaders. Secondly, ever checked out how much of USA culture came from the Native Americans and from "outlier" immigrant groups? Food is an obvious example.
I know in my country, whether most white people know it or not, some aspects of Aboriginal culture have been taken on and in my opinion, it's unfortunate and white culture is the poorer because that's not more widespread. In this country there's been considerable blending of cultures and we're all the richer for it.
I didn't respond to your comment about Asians assimilating into US society (USA is NOT America, by the way, that's another example of your ethnocentricity, it's only PART of America): ever occurred to you that this could well be because their skin colour is closer to white than that of black people and that this could make assimilation easier for them? Also, they weren't enslaved by white people for generations and bought and sold like cattle.