Posted on 06/20/2007 2:55:16 PM PDT by SkyPilot
It's a tragedy, and I blame liberals for it. What liberals have done to black America reminds me of what the Arab world has done to the Palestinians. They've created a politically useful hypervictim who is both pitiful and despicable. I'd love to see liberalism defeated just so that blacks can be freed from the self-pitying, self-destructive mentality that liberalism has cultivated in them. We'd all be much happier, that's for sure.
By the way, I saw a fascinating program on PBS not long ago in which a couple of linguists had studied the evolution of the American black dialect using, among other things, old recordings of black speakers. What they found was that in the early part of the 20th century the English spoken by blacks was remarkeably similar to that of whites. Rural southern blacks -- and back then most blacks were rural and southern -- in particular sounded a lot like rural southern whites.
It wasn't until the great migration of blacks into the northern cities in the forties and fifties that a really distinct accent began to emerge. The researchers attributed this to the radical separation from whites that blacks experienced in the city ghettos. Prior to this, in the South, they had lived lives that were fairly intermingled with whites. But in the North, the isolation in the ghettos was nearly complete, so the language kind of turned in on itself and began a separate evolution. The "othering" of black English was then of course reinforced by notions of black separatism which became popular during the civil rights era, in particular the later civil rights era, which I would add was the part of the civil rights era that was ruined by the liberal-Left.
I'm not sure where I was going with this other than to highlight the point that the transformation of blacks into an alienated group has in important ways -- like language -- definitely been a transformation and not a continuation as the libs would have us believe.
Juneteenth ????
Well educated folks know how to properly read a calendar...... This crowd struggles with counting.
You really need “a better answer” to your ridiculous post, “Can’t we deport (repatriate) these folks?” — ???
Deport them on what account? Being black? Or being black and rioting? Should we deport them all, or just the rioters? Can’t we also deport their white apologists?
And can we deport the rest of the racists, too?
Nevertheless, your point is an excellent one, and worth repeating:
I'm not sure where I was going with this other than to highlight the point that the transformation of blacks into an alienated group has in important ways -- like language -- definitely been a transformation and not a continuation as the libs would have us believe.The sooner we recognize that any social state is "transformative" (such as riots) the closer we will be to a decent solution. But we must be careful not to see the historical southern black experience as in any way mutually-beneficial among the races. Transformative, yes, but from awful beginnings.
Did you see the NY Times magazine article on educator Ruby Payne ( The Class-Consciousness Raiser), who advocates teaching standard English and awareness of linguistic differences and their impact? Academics are infuriated by her. Meanwhile, she makes friends of real educators in the classrooms across the country.
I saw her in that interview. Like most elderly black people she was exceedingly polite, and I noticed that she hesitated and stuttered a little looking for the right word to use, and *youngsters* is what came out.
I got the impression that’s not what she really wanted to call them.
If these guys were named “Suarez” this thread would have 600 posts...
Do you mean that you believe the deportation of criminals is a racist act? (Australia, Georgia, French Guyana)
You’re either not very well versed in history or you are a race-baiting troll. I’d like to think that it is the former, but I suspect that it’s the latter.
Good day.
Thanks for the clarification. You seem to want to deport criminals. Now, the question is, which criminals, as I assume you don’t want to deport all of them. (I mean, Paris Hilton is such a national asset, what a shame it’d be to send her to Liberia II!)
So which ones will it be?
Just the black ones? Or just the ones involved in this incident?
Some people think the violence takes away from the real meaning of Juneteenth.
Meaning most people (liberals/progressives) think it enhances the event????
So which ones will it be?
Just the black ones? Or just the ones involved in this incident?
On the contrary. Deportation of criminals is not only justifiable historically, it also makes good fiscal sense. As such, Paris Hilton would be another outstanding candidate (based largely on her contribution to society).
BTW, Nice try at the repeated race baiting. So how are things at the DU, Troll?
Deportation of criminals is not only justifiable historically...Your twisted attempt to claim a neutral generalization from the qualifications of your first post is as contorted as this claim on history. The braver act would be to admit a hastily worded first post and move on. I hope you will, but do not leave us with a priori historical justifications: just because it once was doesn't make it right now.
Over the past forty years Blacks have been transformed from the least to the most alien of all America's "minority" groups.
It's a tragedy, and I blame liberals for it. What liberals have done to black America reminds me of what the Arab world has done to the Palestinians. They've created a politically useful hypervictim who is both pitiful and despicable. I'd love to see liberalism defeated just so that blacks can be freed from the self-pitying, self-destructive mentality that liberalism has cultivated in them. We'd all be much happier, that's for sure.
Your description of "both pitiful and despicable" is the clarification of the century. What is often forgotten is that all the patronizing of Blacks by liberals has led to a backlash of resentment that no one's supposed to talk about (not that I'm denying the vicious racism that existed prior to modern liberalism).
I have a theory that one reason Blacks vote so overwhelmingly liberal is that liberals make few demands on them to change their traditional beliefs. While white liberal churchgoers probably attend a Unitarian-Universalist or hyper-left Episcopal church with a lesbian priestess, Black leftists (if they can be truly classified as such) still attend fundamentalist churches and worship like West Virginia snake-handlers. Their religion has been untouched by liberalism. I have often wondered if Blacks would have the same affinity for the liberal left if it ever started making the same demands for dogmatic changes of them that it has so long made of whites.
By the way, I saw a fascinating program on PBS not long ago in which a couple of linguists had studied the evolution of the American black dialect using, among other things, old recordings of black speakers. What they found was that in the early part of the 20th century the English spoken by blacks was remarkeably similar to that of whites. Rural southern blacks -- and back then most blacks were rural and southern -- in particular sounded a lot like rural southern whites.
It wasn't until the great migration of blacks into the northern cities in the forties and fifties that a really distinct accent began to emerge. The researchers attributed this to the radical separation from whites that blacks experienced in the city ghettos. Prior to this, in the South, they had lived lives that were fairly intermingled with whites. But in the North, the isolation in the ghettos was nearly complete, so the language kind of turned in on itself and began a separate evolution. The "othering" of black English was then of course reinforced by notions of black separatism which became popular during the civil rights era, in particular the later civil rights era, which I would add was the part of the civil rights era that was ruined by the liberal-Left.
Well, Black English has always been transcribed in a unique way even before the modern era, but as a poor rural Southern white myself (though from the Upper South) I have long known that Blacks are just rednecks with melanin. We share the same everything, yet Blacks have been turned into the Ultimate Alien (quite a feat considering that they've been speaking Southern English and practicing Southern chr*stianity for almost four hundred years).
I would also posit, however, that the dialect of Southern Blacks is more similar to that of the upper class whites who used to own most of the slaves than it is to poor whites (just as Black ministers are more likely to wear vestments, which probably comes from Ole Massa's Episcopal or Catholic church). "Ax" is Chaucerian Middle English and the "ui" pronunciation of "er" is shared by upper class Southern whites and is related to the "oi" associated with Brooklyn (ie, upper class Deep Southern whites and poor Southern Blacks will say "chuich" instead of "church," as a Brooklynite would say "choich"; an Upper South poor white simply says "church").
I'm not sure where I was going with this other than to highlight the point that the transformation of blacks into an alienated group has in important ways -- like language -- definitely been a transformation and not a continuation as the libs would have us believe.
Again you are most correct. I think if the Republican party had finished the job of Reconstruction (not that Reconstruction itself wasn't full of excesses) then Blacks would have remained the Ultimate Americans instead of the Ultimate Un-/Anti-Americans. The blasted Democrats louse up everything they put their hands on.
Well educated folks know how to properly read a calendar...... This crowd struggles with counting.
It's a portmanteau.
Can’t we deport (repatriate) these folks?
qualifications of your first post...
I didn't have any qualifiers at all in my first post. YOU wanted to see racism (an idiotic thing to look for in my posts as I support LAW over anything else, BTW) so you saw racism.
Honestly, next you'll be telling us that you see a connection between politics and automobiles (or some other inane idea)...
Good day. (This is only intended as a dismissal, not as an earnest hope that your day is pleasant.) <<< THAT is a qualifier, BTW.
Can’t we deport (repatriate) these folks?1) The U.S. does not "deport" any but foreign nationals.
So, yes, I was pointing to the racism in a rather obnoxious post.
Now, thanks for the dismissal: I'm glad you've finally decided to give it a rest.
Great comments from you both.
‘As I said, Blacks for a long time were the most American and least alien of all ethnic “minorities”’
I have Puerto Rican neighbors, Indian neighbors and some Pakistani folks across the street. I have commented several times to my wife how we have more in common culturally with immigrants than we do with our native black neighbors. I grew up in a 50/50 black/white environment and it wasn’t always that way.
PC wasn’t the law of the land back then. Extreme PC, more than any other single movement, has given vocal, militant black people the power and voice to insult, accuse, defame and just out-right publicly hate without repercussions of any kind. More often that not they got support instead. The same group has been allowed to successfully re-define black culture. They passively define it as the opposite of those they hate. Basically, white people. They see America as two separate entities. Black America and White America. Every other groups is just a “community”.
These militants, led in part by influential “artists” and actors want “Black America” to be the polar opposite of “White America”. The problem with that is that despite some early shortcomings, what they consider “White America” is mostly good, decent and industrious. Choosing to model a culture on the opposite of that is a recipe for disaster. Segregation lives in every entity with the ethnic reference “Black” in it’s title. For at least two generations now this has been the way of things. They form into little exclusive racial hate-groups to think of ways to to accuse people who don’t form such groups of “racism”. It would be comical if it weren’t so seriously real. It is a way of life now.
My belief--and I may be wrong--is that one reason the Black community (and I mean the community, not just its self-appointed "leaders") behaves as it does politically is that the Left has never demanded that it change any of its religious beliefs (their skin color apparently giving them enough "otherness" to make up for this). If you look at the religious programming on BET you won't find activist preachers. You'll find fundamentalist preachers, including white preachers.
Blacks have never had to confront what they're allied with. If they ever do, then it would be interesting to see what would happen. Unfortunately the same Left that assaults us insulates them. How will we solve this problem? I don't know.
Let me make very clear that my conservatism is almost 100% social/moral/religious. I don't get worked up over "welfare" or even "affirmative action" (since you're always going to have "affirmative action" based on something, anyway). I would be completely willing to see the liberal "social justice" issues coopted by moral/social conservatives, but it seems that to many conservatives social Darwinism is as sacred as the alliance with perverts is to Black political leaders.
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.