Saturday, December 3, 2011

One Time, at Band Camp... FAMU Band Hazing Trumps Graduating

This one time, at band camp a bunch of Black people beat me to do death. Florida A&M (FAMU) drum major Robert Champion, a 26-year-old junior (?), recently died from injuries sustained during intensive hazing from other members of the esteemed Historically Black College and University (HBCU) band.

Look, no hazing policies are a major part of Stuff Black People Don't Like. Black fraternity members continue on the proud tradition of branding that was started in the days of slavery and Black sorority members are known to participate in events that make the flute Alyson Hannigan used in an, ahem, unorthodox manner back in American Pie look like child's play.

What exactly transpired in the hazing death is unknown -- though a culture of hazing in the "famed" FAMU band is a right of passage for our Ebony soul musicians -- but heads are rolling in the wake of the tragedy:

Four band members dismissed from Florida A&M University were allegedly involved in hazing drum major Robert Champion before he died and could face manslaughter charges, said a lawyer linked to the case. 
In the students' dismissal letter, obtained by ABCNews.com, they are accused of "an act of hazing" on Nov. 19 in Orlando, Fla., the day Champion died on a bus after performing with the school's famed marching band. 
The school also charged the students with "conspiracy," defined in the student handbook as "planning with one or more fellow students to commit an act or acts that violate(s) the University Code of Conduct." 
The dismissal notice describes the students' alleged offenses as being of "a serious, heinous or repulsive nature." The students have not been identified. 
Police have said they believe that Champion's death was related to a hazing incident.
The school's band director Julian White, who was fired after Champion's death, identified the four band members who were allegedly involved in hazing the drum major and were dismissed by the school, his lawyer Charles Hobbs told ABCNews.com today. 
"If it's later determined by the sheriff's office [that Champion died from hazing], then the individuals could face more serious charges up to and including manslaughter," Hobbs said.
Champion's death raises a number of questions regarding hazing, but the most important one will go unanswered: outside of the hilarity that HBCU "proud" marchng bands provide, what is the purpose of keeping alive these institutions? I don't just mean the bands, but the HBCU's themselves.

 At a young age, this writer realized that the biggest difference in racial groups was on display when members of a Predominately White Institution (PWI) marching band performed at the halftime of a football game -- with rousing, martial precision -- compared to when HBCU bands engaged in their "jive soul bro" performances.

The Washington Post recently published an article that dripped of hyperbole, but in all seriousness stated that Coppin State (an HBCU in Baltimore) was proud of having an ambitious data-driven plan that had increased its graduation rate to 15 percent. Southern University is having financial and enrollment issues; and The New York Times recently stated that going to an HBCU hurt long-term earnings potential.

What's the point of an HBCU save allowing Black people to have an authentic Black college experience? Perhaps the HBCU system is kept alive to keep from flooding PWI's with an increased crop of academically disinclined Black students, whereby at HBCU's Black students can participate in Black activities without significant oversight?

But with a greater stress to improve the American education system, what role do HBCU's play when they provide some of the worst academic success stories (but some of the "best" band performances...)?:

The president's goal puts new demands on the nation's remaining 105 historically black colleges and universities, popularly referred to as HBCUs. For generations, before civil rights legislation changed admissions policies at traditionally white schools, most African-Americans graduated, in high numbers, from HBCUs. 
Today, however, the overwhelming majority of HBCUs have dismal graduation rates, a phenomenon Obama was aware of when he spoke in Austin. The Associated Press studied six-year graduation rates of 83 four-year HBCUs and found that only 37 percent of black students earned degrees within six years. Just as worrisome as the low completion rate was the fact that the national graduation rate for black students is 4 percentage points higher than that of the HBCUs collectively. 
More bad news came in May from the National Collegiate Athletic Association. The agency banned a record eight teams from postseason play as a result of their athletes' poor academic performance. Four of the teams are at HBCUs, and a fifth is from a school in Illinois designated as predominantly black.


The Journal of Blacks in Higher Education provides data that shows elite colleges have a vested interest in graduating Blacks (as opposed to an HBCU, which all have pitiful graduation rates), lest they be accused of racism. Once you are accepted to elite colleges, the goal is to graduate you, especially if you are Black; it's in keeping acceptance rates low where the real battle to maintain elite status begins.

Yikes...
American education isn't failing; Black people are incapable of maintaining the standards set by white America students. End of story.

In the endless of pursuit of trying to uplift Black students, we have permanently damaged excellence in education by lowering standards to accommodate your typical FAMU band member (smarter Blacks are going to PWIs, but even their they receive preferential treatment).

But that preferential treatment is even worse at the law school level, with Steve Sailer writing:

Indeed, the great majority of elite black law students are beneficiaries of racial preferences. A 2005 study found: 
“… without affirmative action, African American enrollment at the first-tier schools would decline by over four-fifths and at each of the next two tiers by approximately two-thirds.”

On top of that, George Will recently wrote this:
Another study showed that, even if eliminating racial preferences in law schools would mean 21 percent fewer black matriculants, there still would be no reduction in the number of blacks who graduate and pass the bar exam. 
A second brief, submitted by three members of the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights—Gail Heriot, Peter Kirsanow and Todd Gaziano—argues that racial preferences in law-school admissions mean fewer black lawyers than there would be without preferences that bring law students into elite academic settings where their credentials put them in the bottom of their classes.

Wouldn't the prudent thing to do in this situation, with such convincing data at our fingertips, be to encourage Black students at PWI's to migrate back to HBCUs? Remember that at the University of Wisconsin, Black students receive preferential treatment when it comes to gaining admission (denying more qualified white applicants the opportunity to earn an education at the school) to a school that turns around and spends millions upon millions of dollars to celebrate diversity through initiatives and programs that have absolutely no net intrinsic value.

Wait, weren't we talking about FAMU band? Whoops.

The only way to save HBCU's is to encourage Black students seeking an education at a PWI, which they get preferential treatment when they apply yet are largely academically unprepared for the coursework they will encounter, to apply and enroll at HBCU's like Coppin State and Southern.

For those wondering, FAMU has a graduation rate of 34 percent. Perhaps that explains why there is a 26-year-old junior in the band.

In closing, all we can say is this one time, at band camp...





81 comments:

make it rain TRUTH said...

Taking applicants merely because they have black skin creates a situation where you have no idea if he is cut out for your school, or academics in general.

Whether they're failing out at black colleges, or they're failing out at white colleges. Either way, they're overmatched.

How does that help the school? How does it help the student, who is over his head?

All this ridiculousness because we have a culture of "elites" that are simply, utterly incapable of calling a spade a spade and dealing in reality.

Maybe, just maybe, if there were more dealing in reality- we wouldn't see square black pegs being hammered up white round (ass)holes.

D. Freeman said...

Cant lie about some of the things that happen at HBCU's but as a graduate of one whose general friend circle includes 3 engineers, 3 corporate drone, 1 lawyer, 1 all world bad ass (kinda dont know what she does) and sevral other acquaintances who are doing pretty damn well...

Im not seeing the point. College is college and people are people, unless of course theyre black then its in our genes right?

You are right though in that it would probably serve blacks to pretty much avoid most traditional white institutions (TWIs) and attend HBCUs as their track record for those who do graduate is pretty darn good, whereas TWIs are pretty much a crap shoot.

College is very much about the individual over the institution, unless you are talking about the highest of the high or the lowest of the low.

Anonymous said...

"Im not seeing the point."
That's unsurprising. I'll try to explain...
The point is that blacks generally lack the cognitive skills necessary to graduate from college in 4 years, and the existence of HBCU's won't change this fact.

"College is college"
You are aware, I assume, that this statement is utterly meaningless, unless of course, you believe that college is not college.

"and people are people"
Same here.

"unless of course theyre black then its in our genes right?"
Every person is a product of their genes, not just negroes.
The problem is that blacks are largely incapable of assimilating into Western (white) culture, which emphasizes negro-kryptonite values like education, morality, and lawfulness.

I don't expect you to understand...

Anonymous said...

"as a graduate of one whose general friend circle includes 3 engineers, 3 corporate drone, 1 lawyer, 1 all world bad ass"

Zenster, if you're reading this, Freeman is doing the exact thing we discussed on another thread...throwing out a meaningless and irrelevant anecdote for no particular purpose.

I guess it's a black thing.

Thrasymachus said...

HBCUs exist because-

1)Blacks have demanded new privileges, but with absolutely no intent of surrendering old ones, such as their own colleges.

2)Many blacks can't handle even the lower expectations of them at white colleges, and need *no* expectations.

But one aspect easily overlooked is 3)blacks just don't like white environments, and need to be in all-black environments to be happy.

>>Perhaps the HBCU system is kept alive to keep from flooding PWI's with an increased crop of academically disinclined Black students, whereby at HBCU's Black students can participate in Black activities without significant oversight?<<

Elite whites are not stupid. They create environments for themselves that repel blacks, and create spaces where blacks will self-segregate (such as HBCUs and housing projects) to keep blacks out of their hair.

D. Freeman said...

(Bangs head against keyboard)

Why oh why did I come back to this site? I guess i was bored. The idiotic Tebow comment pulled me in and of course then we had the FAM story which is again up my alley. So now here i am arguing with members of a racism support group.

I would love to really respond to the statements here, I really would. But there's just too much nonsense to warrant any type of effort.

One post has someone acting as if they do not understand what "people are people" actually means in yet another straw man attempt to distort my easily understood point.

Another seems to imply that HBCUs are Black exclusive schools. (though your point for #3 is very true, nothing like being surrounded by generally positive like minded people that look like you at an HBCU after being surrounded by raggedy negros/and or iffy white people your whole life.)

And of course we have the usual cherry picked post taking one element of my point out of context and distorting it.

Funny how that "must be a black thing" when the totality of this site seems to be dedicated to throwing out anecdotes of bad experiences with black people and using them to make far reaching statements about all blacks. You know like picking out one of the many hazing incidents that happen at colleges every year and using that to promote a negative ideology about HBCUs nationwide.

But what difference does it make in the end really. Ill let evergreen keep fighting the "good fight" here until i manage to find one of you guys and person and we can have a discussion without the comforting distance of a computer screen where i can call you all out on your logical fallacies as they occur.

Zenster said...

Anonymous (December 3, 2011 8:55 PM): Zenster, if you're reading this, Freeman is doing the exact thing we discussed in another thread … throwing out a meaningless and irrelevant anecdote for no particular purpose.

Thank you, Anonymous (December 3, 2011 8:55 PM), I am reading this and the SOS (Same Old Shite), applies:

D. Freeman: Cant [Sic] lie about some of the things that happen at HBCU's Cant [Sic] but as a graduate of one whose general friend circle includes 3 engineers, 3 corporate drone (s) [Sic] , 1 lawyer, 1 all world bad ass (kinda dont [Sic] know what she does) and sevral [Sic] other acquaintances who are doing pretty damn well...

Wow! Quintuple [Sic]. Your English 101 Professors must be roasting in whatever comic-book-hell they ever dreamed of during the bad acid trip that involved giving you a passing grade.

Im [Sic] not seeing the point. College is college and people are people, unless of course theyre [Sic] black then its [Sic] in our genes right?

RIGHT!

Anonymous said...

Ah, c'mon people, cut D. Freeman (the black commenter above) a break. He's right about a couple things: "college is college" is a perfectly valid observation. This is part of how America works. You gonna tell me nobody here has ever seen "Animal House"?

Lookit (Brooklyn white dude here): this site makes a lot of valid points, but it's counterproductive to deny that there are plenty of intelligent, hard-working, righteous black folks in this country. The political points about BRA made here still stand, but let's give credit where credit is due, and try to open out the conversation usefully, wherever that's possible.

I realize that a lot of people here are venting, and given the difficulties that exist they very much need to vent. But using abusive and demeaning words, and hectoring every black commenter, do more harm than good. D. Freeman is entering the conversation in good faith. There is plenty of room for smart productive blacks to be part of the conversation, and some may even be onside. This is America, black folks are part of our history, nolere volere, and they aren't going to magically vanish overnight. Since the overall goal of a site like this is to try and discover/implement a liveable policy for the races of this continent, let's not be badgering black commenters who try to participate in good faith.

Hey, lookit, when they're wrong they're wrong, like anybody else might be. But I think D. Freeman wasn't wrong, just making some useful points. Have a little goodwill, it's healthy for the soul.

Anonymous said...

Things won't be right with this country until they're all sent back to the Historically Black Continent.

Anonymous said...

I'm not a racist in the sense that I wish harm on blacks, but, damn, they are such a nuisance and I just don't want to be around them. I wish this country would come to its senses and repatriate blacks to their ancestral homelands.

Anonymous said...

Heavens, what a cultural divide! The contrast between the black and white marching bands clearly shows a cultural chasm. How does a society reconcile such a cultural gap?

Anonymous said...

HBCUs exist to further affirmative action programs. In other words, they are yet another source of meaningless jobs and programs for blacks who cannot get real jobs in the real world. For example, the president of Grambling is an empty suit with a PhD in sociology. He was president of academic powerhouse Chicago State University. http://www.gram.edu/offices/administration/president/ Not to be confused, of course, with the University of Chicago.


Grambling's entrance requirements make most junior colleges look like M.I.T. http://www.gram.edu/admissions/specific%20info/requirements/criteria.php

HBCUs should have been shut down a long, long time ago. But since the elites conflate a degree from an HBCU with one from, say, Iowa State, they will continue to exist. After all blacks are still earning a university degree, which is the only thing the elites care about.

Anonymous said...

I teach public high school, and I can vouch that 98% of black high school graduates are incapable of meeting basic admissions of mainstream universities
(University of Texas, University of Georgia, etc.)

I can also vouch that HBCU admission requirements consist of 1)having a pulse and 2)having a (government) check that will clear.

Anonymous White Male said...

Anonymours at 7:07 AM 12/04/2011 said:

I'm not a racist in the sense that I wish harm on blacks, but, damn, they are such a nuisance and I just don't want to be around them. I wish this country would come to its senses and repatriate blacks to their ancestral homelands.

Isn't it funny how there is no standard definition for the word racist? It is whatever some DWL or negro wants it to be. You, my friend, are a racist to probably more than 80% of the American population. Congratulations! You can think for yourself!

Anonymous said...

"You know like picking out one of the many hazing incidents that happen at colleges every year"

Freeman you imbecile, this was not just a "hazing incident", it was a DEATH, and it happened at a "college" where most do not even graduate, which makes it all the more senseless.

For you to try to play it off as normal fratboy horseplay is nothing short of pathetic.

Anonymous said...

"I teach public high school, and I can vouch that 98% of black high school graduates are incapable of meeting basic admissions of mainstream universities"

In my life, I've encountered numerous "graduates" of HBCU's, and most have the English/grammar skills of a third-grader.

Former Liberal said...

http://nationalblackfootsoldiernetwork.blogspot.com/

Paul, off-topic for this particular post but on-topic for the blog in general. This is a literal catalog of every black-on-white crime that the mainstream refuses to cover!

Stephen said...

Dear pseudo enlightened anon at 1:29

"it's counterproductive to deny that there are plenty of intelligent, hard-working, righteous black folks in this country. The political points about BRA made here still stand, but let's give credit where credit is due, and try to open out the conversation usefully, wherever that's possible."

The ONLY reason why there is such a thing as the magic negro that you described is because of their access to White Western Civilization. Take that away and they are nothing more than hominids building huts out of their own shit. So the credit really does go to the White man for everything good in their miserable lives.

Look, I could care less if a negro could spit diamonds and shit gold, I don't want to live around him. You see, the "good" ones like Freeman advocate on behalf of their race to allow more negroes into White societies by playing the "we're not ALL bad card." But when a living space goes 100% black they are. Keep them out. ALL OF THEM. Segration now, tomorrow and forever!

Californian said...

Heavens, what a cultural divide! The contrast between the black and white marching bands clearly shows a cultural chasm. How does a society reconcile such a cultural gap?

Some things recommend themselves:

* A television series in which the heroes are members of a black marching band which, between performances of Souza and Williams, fights injustice on college campuses and in the 'hood?
* A Bill and Melinda Gates Scholarship to anyone in sub-Saharan Africa who can play an instrument while walking in step?
* A special UN commission to blame imperialism, racism and apartheid for their lingering effects on marching band performance?

Zenster said...

Anonymous (December 4, 2011 7:52 AM): How does a society reconcile such a cultural gap?

Throughout history, many other societies have come to grips with the "culture gap" issue. Let's just say that, if history is any indicator, the results are usually not very pretty.

Liberal attempts to forestall America's reconciliation of its various culture gaps only serves to up the butcher's bill when that day of reckoning finally comes.

This exact same thing is happening with respect to how our world deals with Islamic jihad and all it promises is the Muslim holocaust.

Sadly, in their glee at gaining Liberal-enabled access to White society, very few Blacks and Hispanics in America ever take pause to realize that good Liberal intentions are paving them a road straight to hell.

Anonymous said...

As a man of 50 years of age i've dealt with every type of humanity you can think of,and let me tell you, outside of farm animals, there is nothing dumber than a black person!
In the mid 80's I went to purdue university. The few blacks attending must have been there because of a football scholarship or affiramitve action, most could barely walk and talk at the same time,I tried tutoring some of them and they are completely incapable of logically thinking, I would have had better lucky tutorial the chair they were sitting on.

Anonymous said...

Stephen @ 9:57 --

You're sort of missing the point. I'm not talking about any "magic negro", I'm talking about developing aspects of the discussion that could lead somewhere useful. D. Freeman in his comment, walked into a rather hostile environment and cheerfully offered some solid observations, in good faith. I don't think somebody like that should be shouted out of the room, which is pretty much what happened. I think guys like him should be welcomed to the discussion, insofar as it is a discussion and not just some frustrated venting.

The irony of BRA is that it actually isn't in black folks' best interests. (It's happening for other reasons, but that's another topic altogether.) It's clearly not a good life, living off EBT and AA and public housing, with high rates of criminality. Black folks aren't actually getting a good deal out of BRA. I think if people could be clearly persuaded of certain policies, in the absence of the sort of hysteria that permeates so much language concerning race, we'd find a lot of improvement for both black and white folks.

Consider this: D. Freeman's point was on the cusp of the notion that AA policy is not necessarily the best thing for black folks. (Sailer has been discussing this lately, too.) If HBCUs were filled up with more of the talented blacks who now get cherry-picked by top white schools thanks to AA distortions, then the quality of those schools and their graduation rates would improve, lots of blacks would connect with successful career paths more in keeping with their realistic prospects in a more supportive community environment, and there would still be plenty of room for very highly talented black students at top white schools who can handle the work there.

Freeman was toying with this concept, and instead people just threw rotten tomatoes at him. It doesn't strike me as constructive.

I realize there are a lot of people here who are simply very frustrated by the state of things, and just want to let off a bit of steam and kick the furniture a bit. I'm disconcerted by a lot of the ugly language one sees in the comments here, but somehow I doubt that these people are actually hard-core racists, I tend to think most of them are just exasperated and letting themselves vent. Don't know if I'm right or not, but that's my hunch.

It's Paul's site so he can take it in whatever direction he thinks best, but I feel that having intelligent discussions about how to make useful policy is in the best interests of everyone, black, white and purple, and that shouting people down and using abusive terms isn't the most persuasive way to reach all the people you'll need (and you'll need a lot) to make real, lasting improvements.

Silent Running said...

There is plenty of room for smart productive blacks to be part of the conversation, and some may even be onside.

I don't know what conversation you think you're taking part in, but for me this website is about White Survival. It's about expanding the ranks of Those Who Can See, not finding common ground with a race defined by its savages. The black "take" on White Survival is academic, and that's being extremely generous.

This is America, black folks are part of our history, nolere volere, and they aren't going to magically vanish overnight.

Carthage was once part of Rome's history, until one day in 146 BC when it ceased to be part of anyone's history. Note that "part of our history" doesn't imply friendly relations.

D. Freeman said...

Anon- 3:38


I raise my glass.

You are so right on every point it embarrasses me that I havent made a similar statement yet.

Most progressive Black intellects will tell you that the many things of "BRA" such as the welfare state are not at all productive for black people. Worse yet, college educated people like myself get tired of being held to the same standard that they do and feel the same effects that they create. Aside from Affirmative action (for the reasons you see here, i dont trust White America to act in a fair manner in terms of employment and other matters) I would definitely be in favor of severe welfare reform, a complete rework of the education system, and a complete overhual of the justice system in ways that many blacks would cry foul at. But then i remember that to do so i would have to trust people like Zenster and Kersey who seem more interested in hysterics than change.

You were very accurate in calling this site a place for frustrated white people to vent, thats why sites like these are soooo popular on the internet. Its sad becuase a real discussion here could be so useful in spreading the types of ideas and attitudes to promote positive change for everyone, but why o why would I or any other black person want to empower anyone whose ideology promotes the type of behavior you see here?

YT said...

" "college is college" is a perfectly valid observation. This is part of how America works. You gonna tell me nobody here has ever seen "Animal House"?"

It's actually not valid. Not every college and major is a 4(or 6) year party full of worthless programs and majors. Sure, lots of white kids attend these schools and piss away 4 years learning poly sci, african studies or ancient religions but don't even think of comparing HBCUs with a pitiful graduation rate to all the others.

Lookit (Brooklyn white dude here): this site makes a lot of valid points, but it's counterproductive to deny that there are plenty of intelligent, hard-working, righteous black folks in this country.

Statistically, sure there should be some. Only about 5 million with an IQ of 100, 900 thousand with an IQ f 115 or more. But that's why they're called Magic Negros. Because you are told they exist, you see them on TV but can anyone say they've ever met just one? The best I can say is that I met one that seemed on top of his game but it was a subject I didn't know. I didn't figure out this one was full of shit until he was gone and someone else was unfucking his shit.

I mean really..... we know we can't believe what's on our TV or newspaper so all we have are these anecdotes. But what do you call a shitload of anecdotes? A true hypothesis.

If anything, IQ tests are not accurate because they don't show blacks as inept enough.



But I'm sure they're out there somewhere, these people like us but with black skin, I'm sure they're just hiding behind the unicorns, Minotaurs and banging the magical fairies.

Zenster said...

D. Freeman: … i dont trust White America to act in a fair manner in terms of employment and other matters…

Then why are you still here? Why not hie yourself off to some African utopia? You cannot have it both ways, even if you do like to speak out of both sides of your mouth. Remember, it is us evil Whites who have made it possible for you to enjoy a standard of living that is the envy of this entire world.

But then i remember that to do so i would have to trust people like Zenster and Kersey who seem more interested in hysterics than change.

I wonder if you realize how big a fool you make of yourself by intentionally mischaracterizing people. All it does is throw into question your own veracity and cast doubt upon everything you contribute here.

As to why BRA is so unhealthy for American Blacks; just look to Africa for the answer.

The mindset of corruption which permeates so much of Black culture ensures that intramural predation will be the norm. It doesn't take rocket science to figure out that low IQ people will generally choose other low IQ people to victimize.

The notion of "low hanging fruit" is a guiding principal for a lot of Black people, if not a defining trait of their entire culture. The pursuit of convenience ensures a lack of advancement.

Stephen said...

The only thing constructive when discussing black "people" is a way to permanently separate from them. The rest is just bsing around. Whites suffer from their presence and they are a plague to us all. I care for the plight of the negro just as much as I care for ticks on my dog's hide.

You may or may not be new to this kind of discussion, but after years of studying racial matters with all ideas on the table, the only feasible solution is permanent separation. A peaceful separation is most ideal, but the negroes have proven that to be impossible.

If you think BRA is harmful to negroes, how do you think it's affecting Whites? The idea that negroes are negatively affected because BRA increases dependency on Whites is irrelevant considering dependency is the ONLY thing they are capable of! Since first coming into contact with them, all that they've been able to contribute is dead weight.

And just what does it take to be a "black intellectual" anyway? Not very much. All you have to do is parrot the mainstream egalitarian world view and you'll be worshipped by DWLs everywhere.

Anonymous said...

Stephen, whites vote with their feet. That's why suburbs first came about, and then exurbia. Now whites are moving back into the inner city (think Washington, D.C.) and forcing the Democrats into the suburbs.

And the beat goes on....

Anonymous said...

My first comment here, on a great site. [As a hardened thought-criminal of the first stripe, I have commented at other crimethinking blogs].

Thanks to Stephen 9:57AM for calling out Anon 1:29. He[?] reeks of collegiate brainwashing.

Mr. Anon said this: " it's counterproductive to deny that there are plenty of intelligent, hard-working, righteous black folks in this country". Without exploring the legitimate question of "counterproductive" for whom?, I reject his intelligence-insulting misuse of the word "plenty" there. "Plenty" is a vague, unquantifiable term, but clearly he's got it completely backward: there are nothing like "plenty" of "intelligent, hard-working, righteous black folks in this country".

On the contrary, there is a profound shortage of "intelligent, hard-working, righteous black folks in this country". If the word "plenty" applied, the black "community" would have corrected its own course already.

Clearly that has not happened, is not happening now, and shows no sign of happening later. "Anon"'s Pavlovian happy-talk is just more "Can't we all just get along?"--and just as clueless.

[By funny coincidence, I see that Anon has recently reposted. Now there's some timing! And 'D. Freeman' is back as well. Talk about a target-rich environment...]

I'll be back.

Mountainsniper31 said...

For a better look at precision in the European style, check out the Swiss Top Secret Drum Corps

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SftWHL0TPh8&feature=youtube_gdata_player

Ben N Indiana said...

I've decided to give up on my goal o becoming a professional NBA player.

And, while I'm in the resignation mood, I'm also surrendering my dreams of wearing an NFL jersey. My dreams of topping country music charts are also going by the wayside. I'm seriously considering giving up my ambition of being Pope.

I could blame racial discrimination, I suppose. Then, again, maybe it's a lack of raw talent that keeps me locked out of the NBA, NFL and CMA. And I can't read Latin.

It seems the genetic code that made my eyes blue also limits my ability to dribble a basketball, made my frame a bit smaller than a linebacker's left leg, and a lack of knack for playing the guitar.

Could it also be that nature, not nurture, is to blame for academic failures of black people? Could it be that racism has nothing to do with their inability for innovation and invention? That the genetic hand that deals kinky hair also doles out limited intellectual aptitude?

In a free-market society some of us will advance while others will be left behind. I accept my lot in life as being somewhat dumber than Alfred Einstein, less able than Larry Bird, not as astute as Warren Buffet and not as agile as Richard Simmons. Thank goodness.

Maybe it's time black folks face the reality that, on an average, they have a collective IQ a bit above retardation.

Or was it Arnold Einstein?

Anonymous said...

D. Freeman @ 4:42: "I raise my glass."

Cheers, bud. Thanks for stepping back into the fray. I hope you'll stick around.

You made a bunch of interesting points that I'd like to address at greater length later, but since I'm doing a bunch of replies now, this comment may get long, so I'm going to try to limit myself and return in more detail tomorrow.

The big rallying point of course is: yeah, sure, we can talk. See, guys? It's not that hard! You and I will probably agree about policy points B, C, and D, disagree about points X, Z, and W, and be in only partial agreement about H, J, and K... but the point is we're able to discuss all this rationally, without jumping back into the trenches and calling each other silly names.

Another major point is, we both recognize that there exists (or at least there _could_ exist) a suite of policy decisions that would benefit both white and black folks. It's not a zero-sum game. The big perceptual problem is, certain types of policy that are strongly beneficial to whites are actually ALSO beneficial to blacks, but the black political community has a large revanchist wing, and has distorted its perceptions so that it's difficult for them to see that. Now there's a matter that would be worth a post and a careful discussion.

But I'll get into it in more detail later, and I hope you will, too. One thing I would say is, don't get too paranoid about the seemingly harsh tone here. Pushback is a part of good negotiation. If Kersey and Zenster et al seem to you to be too harsh, keep in mind that they're pushing back against a very hard line that's been aimed at guys like them. Best defense, offense, etc etc.

Silent Running: "this website is about White Survival."

I get that, and I'm on board with the concept, believe it or not. But you have to take a longer view, and realize that there's a better chance of success through policy manipulation than there is through sterner measures. The internet is full of people spouting on about stocking up on canned goods and ammo, and "keeping their powder dry," but that sort of thing is marginally silly, and anyway it's an absolute last-ditch, zombie-apocalypse scenario. It's not realistic here in 2011. If you want to talk about secession, I can talk with you about which river and port systems need to be secured, which is a realistic discussion about How You Do It, but in my opinion we aren't anywhere near close to that yet. Policy is a better way to go, it avoids all the bad stuff, and it actually promises a better outcome for everyone involved, without anyone's hair getting mussed. Is it a long, boring, slow slog? Why yes it is. But trust me, it's a heckuva lot better than Carthago Delenda Est, which you aren't gonna achieve even if you try.

Besides, black folks aren't the primary threat to white survival, mass immigration is. The problems caused by black folks are very real, but they can be solved through sane, humane policy approaches. Mass immigration is another kettle of fish.

To me, the main value of this site is to alter and enhance people's political and social vocabulary so they can see What's Really Going On. But once having perceived that, leading some zany sort of Pickett's Charge against the black community isn't really going to solve anybody's problems, and will end up making matters worse. SBPDL is a finger, pointing to the moon. Look at the moon, not at the finger.

Californian said...

If HBCUs were filled up with more of the talented blacks who now get cherry-picked by top white schools thanks to AA distortions...

There used to be a radical leftwing argument that the real objective of affirmative action was to take potential black leaders out of the black community and make them work for The Man. Meanwhile, the majority of blacks would sink ever lower, or be oppressed ever more, depending on the spin. Well, all that is pretty much what happened, though whether it was intentional or not is a question.

The big question I ask of DWLs is, when is all this AA and related race hustling gonna end? I can never get much of an answer, other than AA et alia will end when we have "equality." In practical terms, this means that blacks will be a legally privileged group until the entire system disintegrates.

Californian said...

D._Freeman said: I would definitely be in favor of severe welfare reform, a complete rework of the education system, and a complete overhual of the justice system in ways that many blacks would cry foul at. But then i remember that to do so i would have to trust people like Zenster and Kersey who seem more interested in hysterics than change.

Bear in mind that the bloggers here have no real power, at least not now. One reason race realists may end up with power is that if/when the country gets pushed too far there will be a backlash which will get really, really ugly. Happened before, look at how the US went from Reconstruction to "Birth of a Nation."

The thing is, Mr D._Freeman, what are you doing to get the reforms you listed in place? Are you speaking up in the black community? Or better, telling DWLs to take their AA and social engineering and shove 'em?


You were very accurate in calling this site a place for frustrated white people to vent, thats why sites like these are soooo popular on the internet. Its sad becuase a real discussion here could be so useful in spreading the types of ideas and attitudes to promote positive change for everyone, but why o why would I or any other black person want to empower anyone whose ideology promotes the type of behavior you see here?


Well, long and complicated answer, but let me sum up some points:

* When race realists try to discuss these matters rationally, they are shouted down, terminated from their jobs, subjected to mob violence, hit with lawsuits, and, in Europe, thrown in jail (look at the video of the English woman recently hauled off in chains for saying a few unpleasant truths on a tram).

* Given this, why should any race realist in his or her right mind stick their neck out? Does what SBPDL calls "BRA" think we can go on like this forever? That sooner or later there will not be some sort of massive backlash?

* What kind of positive changes are going to be brokered? Are the NAACPs and the Sharptons, and the Congressional Black Caucuses, and et alia, going to stop the race hustling? White people have given blacks everything -- everything! -- they have demanded since 1954. And what concessions have the black establishment made in return? As far as I can determine the answer is "none."

* Go back to the 1950s and 1960s, and you will see that people who today would be called race realists did make reasoned arguments, backed with the scientific knowledge of the day, and tried to come up with policies which were intended to promote progress on racial issues (progress in the sense of solutions which were workable for each race separately). The response was mass acts of civil disobedience, urban rioting, and occasional acts of terrorism, all from the civil rights movement. How can a rational debate be held under such circumstances?

* As for empowering The Paul Kerseys of the world, this is an interesting statement. It implies that blacks are indeed the power brokers in America. And that the "racists" -- whom we are told dominate every "institution" in America, have no power. But then, this gets to the heart (perhaps just a ventricle) of the matter: blacks simply do not seem to want to compromise. There is always one more set of demands (and always a mob of DWLs to egg them on).

* Why not tell us at what point the race hustling will end? Will it be when we have reached the magic land of "equality?" When every last white person has been driven into a state of utter abnegation? Or when white people get pushed too far and stand up and say, "No!"

It's in your court, give us an answer.

Anonymous said...

Wise Anon said:

"The big rallying point of course is: yeah, sure, we can talk. See, guys? It's not that hard!"

More finger wagging. Smart, moderate whitey knows whats best for all of us. He straddles the middle, commits to no side, knows what is best for us, believes in nothing, and has the nerve to lecture us on what we ought to do to be "fair". This guy is worse than a DWL. A true enemy of whites.

D. Freeman hates your white guts, and you look like a weak, pandering schmuck of a white boy to him. Blacks are laughing at you for being a weakling and not looking out for you own kind. Blacks really long for whites to stop being pussies and take their rightful place at the top.

Wise Anon, please read more....

http://onestdv.blogspot.com/2011/12/race-pandering-fails.html

"...I no longer believe a colorblind approach to race, whereby we're all just "Americans", can manifest or solve our racial problems. Quite simply, blacks and other minorities will never go along with it, preferring race hatred of whites and unending complaints about discrimination to peaceful coexistence...."

Anonymous said...

"Cheers, bud. Thanks for stepping back into the fray. I hope you'll stick around."


Casual statements like this and the use of labels like "black folk" make me want to vomit. This guy is taking Negro worship to a new level.

Pander much, Anon?

Anonymous said...

"...a real discussion here could be so useful in spreading the types of ideas and attitudes to promote positive change for everyone,"

Positive change for everyone??? WTF.
Whites are doing just fine without the Negro, but not so true the other way around. You want positive change for blacks only. This can not be done. Blacks are limited by nature. You are playing God. You are a race baiter, a shakedown artist, a black victimologist to the core.

Sounds like typical, squishy liberal ideology to me.

Freeman, you need to get real with yourself, man. You have your head too far up your own ass. We will never get where you want to go because it is not based on reality. Where are blacks successful in the world without white people propping them up? Why the hell should I sacrifice my liberty for your BRA?

Liberals like you don't like facts and stats because the truth does not fit into your utopian views.

Read "Racism Schmacism" by James Edwards.

"But here's a dirty little secret that James exposes in Racism, Schmacism. When liberals and race hustlers use the word "racist," it doesn't have the meaning it used to have—someone filled with hate and animosity for other races. No, when when the race hustlers and leftists use the word "racist," they simply mean "conservative white person."
Period.
Until you get this, you will never understand politics in modern day America. And once you do grasp it, you'll be amazed at how everything suddenly starts making sense."

Freeman, you are exhibiting a form of liberal mental illness. Come live in a black ghetto for a year and you will see the truth. You don't live anywhere NEAR ghetto blacks (the kind with the sagging pants.) Blacks are not capable of even washing themselves on a regular basis let alone participating in a complicated society.

Anonymous said...

Blacks can not survive or find success in the West without being propped up by whites and their money. Period. Show me a place that exists NOW. And don't say black Egypt. And don't say "after slavery". These stories in black mythology have all been debunked over and over again.

Go, Freeman. Build your black utopia. Maybe you would become King.

Please leave me out of it.

Midwestern said...

Will one of the black/DWL posters please tell us what value blacks add to anything?

Thought not.

I recently overheard some black co-workers talking about a young black woman who just lost her "Officer of Diversity" job at a major corporation in Chicago. The company completely eliminated the diversity department to trim costs.

Upon hearing the news, one black woman said, "They are trying to send us back to Africa." Who is they? Evil Whitey. The blue eyed devil. Blacks rely on us for there mere existence.

If my husband lost his job, I would find a way to pay the bills. I would work any job(s) so that my family did not starve. I would cut back. I would see it as a learning/growth experience.

Blacks can not do this. They don't have the skill to bounce back. That is what their racial "progress" is all about. The endless transfer of everything from whites to blacks. Once that ends, in their minds, it is back Africa.

Anonymous said...

For all the folks who are slamming back at me with vitriol for being a "DWL", if you paused and thought about it you'd realize that's not the case. I'm not "lecturing" anybody on anything, I'm proposing that the whole "What Is To Be Done?" conversation actually be realistic; look at the real landscape in front of you, and figure out what can actually be achieved. Good Cop/Bad Cop tactics do have their proper place in negotiation, and if some of you want to do Bad Cop, I can see your point, but "All Bad Cop, All the Time" isn't a winning strategy.

All this talk about "Look at (the disaster that is) Africa" is an argument about past history, it's not an argument about actual policy today in America.

I admit it's an uphill battle, and the way that racial politics is constructed in this country at present is inane, intellectually ridiculous, and actively hostile to white interests. That, again, is one of the strengths of this site, that it opens people's eyes to various things, and expands the vocabulary of What Can Be Talked About. But the vitriol is a) non-intellectual in nature, and b) won't persuade the "swing" elements that you're going to need to bring onside.

I maintain that it's possible to construct a national policy (getting it implemented without the courts obstructing it is another matter) that benefits whites without harming blacks. In fact, since (you're right) black prosperity is substantially tethered to white prosperity, such a policy would benefit blacks too, although their political leadership wouldn't realize it at first, because they're so dug into race revanchism. One first has to identify what "the good" is, and see it for what it is. If Asians and Latinos become dominant groups in this country, then blacks are going to be out of luck, because those groups won't care about blacks. So blacks actually have a vested interest in white prosperity, their leadership just needs to be apprised of this sticky little chess position.

Who are your allies? Here's an experiment: go back and look again at the video posted in PK's original post, of the FAMU marching band performance. Look at the people in the crowd. Look at their faces.

Those aren't the sullen, hollow-eyed thugs of the Black Undertow that Kersey analyzes so effectively (well I do spot one or two, but mostly not). Those are mainly jolly, good-humored family people, out enjoying the Big Game for their school. And there's a whole stadium full of them. They may not be a bunch of nuclear-physics PhD's, but you can tell they're mostly regular middle-class family types, out having some good clean fun. Unlikely as it sounds, they could become your allies, if you can figure out a way to get them onside and make them see what their best interests really are.

If you don't like the FAMU band's style that's a matter of taste, but come on and be fair, it's cheeky and witty and good-humored, and it doesn't skimp on precision. Not everybody plays it straight like Notre Dame, though I admire that style too. I've seen some great white marching bands that get just as goofy, it's part of the schtick. I think it's part of what makes America cool, you wouldn't see that sort of thing in North Korea.

None of what I'm saying contradicts the general thrust of Kersey's analysis, when you get down to it. It's just a question of, How do you think about it productively, how do you find options that will actually work and make sense, and ultimately, you'll be a lot more clear-sighted if you can find a way to do it without cultivating hatred. I know people here are angry, and it makes sense to be angry. But remember: crafty, scheming Odysseus made it home alive from the Trojan War. Angry, blustering Ajax and Achilles didn't.

Anonymous said...

What does a diversity officer do?

(real question)

Zenster said...

Anonymous (December 5, 2011 1:00 AM): It's not a zero-sum game.

Except for the way that most Blacks play it.

Your point is absolutely correct and ― in the same way that Black Liberation theology is Marxism dressed up with a frayed clerical collar ― for what little Blacks understand of Marxism they certainly get the Zero Sum Game.

Given how many chances they have had to abandon that destructive strategy, I don't see Blacks doing it anytime soon.

The big perceptual problem is, certain types of policy that are strongly beneficial to whites are actually ALSO beneficial to blacks, but the black political community has a large revanchist wing, and has distorted its perceptions so that it's difficult for them to see that.

Which normally would be their problem save that they forcibly make it our problem as well.

Now there's a matter that would be worth a post and a careful discussion.

Hearty agreement on that. All of the "Black Power" movements seem to have this feature in common and it needs to be held up to some disinfecting sunlight.

If Kersey and Zenster et al seem to you to be too harsh, keep in mind that they're pushing back against a very hard line that's been aimed at guys like them.

A very worthy assessment whose ultimate accuracy you could never possibly begin to guess at.

I get that, and I'm on board with the concept, believe it or not. But you have to take a longer view, and realize that there's a better chance of success through policy manipulation than there is through sterner measures.

The only problem is that Liberals are displaying an obscene adeptness at manipulating policy while American Conservatives are being shouted down by Democrats and Republicans alike as racist Nazis.

All of which is guaranteeing a catastrophic system failure.

The internet is full of people spouting on about stocking up on canned goods and ammo, and "keeping their powder dry," but that sort of thing is marginally silly, and anyway it's an absolute last-ditch, zombie-apocalypse scenario. It's not realistic here in 2011.

Again, it's one that both sides of the aisle are actively pushing America towards. If you are not maintaining a few months of food stocks, then you are the silly one. If it isn't "realistic here in 2011", just wait a few dozen months.

Besides, black folks aren't the primary threat to white survival, mass immigration is.

However factual that may be, Blacks also vote overwhelmingly Democratic and, thereby, are a de facto driver of increased immigration. That they also cause so much crime which interferes with timely prosecution of illegal immigrants is a force multiplier that causes Blacks in general to have an even more deleterious effect upon American society.

The problems caused by black folks are very real, but they can be solved through sane, humane policy approaches.

Not unless they pull up their socks and demonstrate some genuine cohesive behavior. Nothing of the sort has been forthcoming after decades of enhanced opportunities.

Mass immigration is another kettle of fish.

Boy howdy, you got that one right.

SBPDL is a finger, pointing to the moon. Look at the moon, not at the finger.

From where I stand, D. Freeman is looking at an awful lot of fingers.

Zenster said...

Californian: There used to be a radical leftwing argument that the real objective of affirmative action was to take potential black leaders out of the black community and make them work for The Man.

Liberals and their pet minorities (e.g., Blacks), just can't get enough of their conspiracy theories, can they? But only if they involve demonizing Whitey. Try getting Blacks to understand that Al Sharpton is nothing but a race baiting wannabe warlord pimp and they'll get all indignant on ya.

I can never get much of an answer, other than AA et alia will end when we have "equality."

I would use the Arab-Israeli conflict as a model. Muslim tyrants promise us that political reform will happen but only after the "Palestinian question" has been resolved. Of course, the Muslims have absolutely no intention of arriving at any sort of peace with Israel as this would be a frank admission of how jihad had failed and the genocide mandated by Qur'anic doctrine would have to go unfulfilled.

In practical terms, this means that blacks will be a legally privileged group until the entire system disintegrates.

Which is a very precise description of the current status quo.

Anonymous said...

From Wikipedia:

"The chief diversity officer or CDO is an organization’s executive level diversity and inclusion strategist. According to journalist Bill Picture, about 20% percent of Fortune 500 companies employ diversity officers (Asian Week, Nov. 26, 2005). Steve O. Michael, Kent State University’s Vice President of Diversity Initiatives developed a database in 2006 with roughly 400 diversity officers on college and university campuses. About 80 had the chief diversity officer (CDO) title."

Anonymous said...

Zenster -- good to see you concur with at least some of what I've been saying. Now if I can get you and Freeman to take each other seriously, that'd be an interesting day's work!

A lot of your analysis is sharp. I notice that you referred numerous times to black political outlook and leadership. Since this aspect of things is not really HBD-dependent, but is rather mostly driven from above by black social and political leadership, it's susceptible to persuasion, outside pressure, and change.

As you and others have pointed out, the racial spoils system is about to come to a crashing halt, since there pretty much just aren't any more spoils left. Ironically this would probably put a lot of leverage back into white interests. It would, for example, at least potentially put the black leadership in a position to re-evaluate their stance on immigration, since a pan non-white coalition will no longer yield spoils, and the various members would be in direct competition for jobs and whatever's left. The Democrats at the moment are solidly pro-immigration but nothing lasts forever, there could in the future develop an opposing wing within the party. I wouldn't put the odds as likely, but it isn't beyond imagination.

That's just one example. A combination of leverage, persuasive politics, carrots and sticks, some crafty horse-trading, etc etc should be able to yield at least some results in the areas you sketched out.

It's one way of thinking about things, anyway.

D. Freeman said...

@ californain/Anon et al

So much to say, but i honestly lack the impetus to respond to everything here especially considering the fact that within a week i am sure this thread will be buried under a pile of Tim Tebow articles. ill try to get to most of what deserves response.

*"moderate" anon, your presence here is greatly appreciated on my part. It is at least somewhat a disruption to the usual whining and haranguing that occurs here. Your assessments about the black community, the idiocy of black leadership, the mutual threat of immigration, and so on are all pretty spot on. For anyone who thinks that the totallity of the black community is in line with clowns like Al Sharpton, why dont you check out the depiction of him in "The Boondocks" or even "freaknik the musical"although you would probably disagree greatly with much of the shows message, you will at least be able to recognize the fact that we definitely have common enemies (white elites and their black puppets) and common opinions on many things. What has to happen (and could happen much easier than you think considering much of black America's sheep like habits when following their annointed leaders) is a full thought movement of principle. Look up Booker T washington, a black man with a visionary stance on what needed to be done with black people post salvery. Sadly he was well before his time and is often unfairly labled "the first sellout" even by myself at a younger age.

*Cali- you make a lot of statements that i wish i could respond to effectively, but this is just not the place for that long of a post. I offer that you find a message board (hopefully a civil one) to continue this discussion in a situation where it is less likely to be buried in a week. It can be a "quasi" racist one if you like, just as long as it is more for discussion than blogging.

But to take an admittedly insufficient a crack at a few things
-Your image of "civil" discourse needs some reworking if you have the mind to cite that loud belligerent woman on that UK bus. I dont care what the circumstances are that will never be counted as civil discussion. This is and the fact that race realism although viable as a theory simply cannot by itself explain enough concepts involved with the problems of blacks/Africans. Your adherence to it as the end all be all of the issue is the downfall of the theory as a whole.

*There may have been some "race realists" on the opposition of the civil rights movement during the 60s, but they were often surrounded by murderers and rapists. Strange fruit isnt just a song, and Emmit Till isnt a football player. You all really don't get the fact that the outright evil intertwined (not necessarily inherent) with some of your theories is a very real thing with a long history. How many black people do you think were killed during the civil rights movment in those "terrorist acts" Who were those acts commited by? Next you will say that the holocuast didnt happen. This is why people dont want to have civil discourse because the very discussion comes from a place of extreme disrespect. The fact that you keep glossing over it is one of the reason why few African Americans of intelligence will ever take you seriously and less intelligent ones will shout you down or worse.

*Race "hustlin" is a deep concept. I guess this depends on what you consider race "hustlin" If it is related to the Sharptons, Jacksons, and Farakhans of the world, then if you were paying attention you would see that their power and influence has severely dwindled in the last 15 years, especially among Blacks any level of intelligence. But if its the belief and recognition of real disparities in daily life, the workforce, education policy. Then i guess it may never end. But i also dont think we are talking about the same thing, nor do you seem to have a realistic image of what is really going on.

Continued...

D. Freeman said...

Do you know that most educated blacks severely hate the depiction of black people in Hollywood, including the "magical" Negroes in the help, or that Disney dolphin movie, Rudy, The Shawshank redemption, etc. No, you guys assume that most blacks think that our unrealistic and essentially inhuman depiction in Hollywood is something we love. The irony of this site, is that if you all actually knew some real black people this sight may not need to exist. Its like you all dont realize that the kids that flunk out of FAM are not going to go home and set up a crackhouse.

but again, there is too much to say and too little time let alone will. Im willing to hit a message board to continue this discussion as i know there will be further arguments and questions to respond too, but i just am not willing to deal with the relatively cumbersome way things work on this site, especially considering the overall tone of the spectators.

@zenster/Kersey
Props to Tebow for his game yesterday. He played like an actual qaurterback. Ironic that "black guys cant throw" considering Tebow's throwing ability until yesterday. But as i said yesterday, with some time he could be a legend. I wonder if Micheal Bishop feels the same way?

Also, Id like to ask the spectators who they think has more innate natural athletic ability. A football player (of any ethnicity) or a horse jockey/fencer/skeet shooter...

Please don't say anything about skill, training, practice, concentration, we're talking about pure athletic prowess from natural enhanced ability.

Anonymous said...

How many black people do you think were killed during the civil rights movment in those "terrorist acts" Who were those acts commited by?

Not that many compared to the numbers killed each year by black men these days.

Zenster said...

Anonymous (December 5, 2011 2:58 PM): As you and others have pointed out, the racial spoils system is about to come to a crashing halt, since there pretty much just aren't any more spoils left. Ironically this would probably put a lot of leverage back into white interests.

One problem being that by the time this crash happens ― White productivity and technological mastery notwithstanding ― demographics alone may have shifted enough political influence out of the hands of Whites to where any consensus or quorum, even, may not be available.

As you yourself note, "a pan non-white coalition will no longer yield spoils", so what's a largely parasitic Black population to do?

One central issue also remains in that ― much akin to how "the black political community has a large revanchist wing" ― there is among most Blacks, not just an ingrained hatred of Whites, but a near-congenital rejection of all White behavior which amounts to nothing more or less than anti-civilization behavior.

How, exactly, is America's Black community going to perform such an abrupt about face and suddenly adopt the exact value set it has spent the last half century or more spurning with such unnatural vigor?

And it must be a sudden reversal of attitude because the EBT clock is running down wicked fast.

Worse yet is getting that "large revanchist wing" of the "black political community" to give up its perks of office. Good luck with that. Like Sharpton and Jeremiah Wright, these career politicians (i.e., Jesse Jackson et al), have built their entire lives and reputations upon perpetuating White Man's Burden.

Persuading them to ask that their Black constituencies encourage Whites to cast off that immensely lucrative historical onus will be like pulling teeth through the … well, we'll just say "nostrils" for right now.

As to "black social and political leadership" being "susceptible to persuasion, outside pressure, and change", Obama certainly doesn't paint any sort of glowing picture with respect to that.

Anonymous said...

"I dont care what the circumstances are that will never be counted as civil discussion."

Ha. Hahahaha!

I had to laugh at this nonsense.
Have you ever tried to tell a black woman to stop talking so loud? To stop cursing in front of you small children? To wait in line like everyone else?

Blacks will cut your head off if you even ask them POLITELY to show some respect in public. Whites have tried to be civil with blacks, but they act like violent animals. Every comment/criticism is "racist" and "you not my Mama!" and "bitch, don't make me have to slap yo ass...", etc.

Give me a break. You can not reason with blacks. They can slip into a nigga moment or "sudden savage syndrome" without notice.

Who cares about black people and their sensitivities? White racial attitudes are hardening, and WE DON'T CARE TO GIVE ANY OF YOU A CHANCE. It is not worth the risk. You dig?

Anonymous said...

"Do you know that most educated blacks severely hate the depiction of black people in Hollywood,"

Cite a source for this please. Did you take a f-ing black survey? Are you an expert of most blacks because you are one? We have heard this before, trust me. Every black poster on here accuses us of living in our little whitey world and having no experience with 'real blacks'.

Is this why Tyler Perry movies are always chock full of blacks? They LOVE being black and ghetto. I smell bullshit, D.

And here is a little bit of truth for you. We ALL know several blacks in our lives, thanks to AA and diversity. We are swamped with them,..all kinds...fat, ghetto, slim, educated, married, single, poor, drunk, high, middle-class, even a few wealthy. If the educated blacks were so great, we would not be so finished with all of you. All blacks eventually regress to the mean. They become more similar to their African brethren as each generation is born. Blacks cannot function in a civilized society, no matter how much we pay them.

Anonymous said...

OOh and ouch! Not the vitriolic rhetoric charge again. That one is almost as scary as the racist charge.

Try something else.

Anonymous said...

"Also, Id like to ask the spectators who they think has more innate natural athletic ability. A football player (of any ethnicity) or a horse jockey/fencer/skeet shooter..."

We don't care what you want to ask. Please go away.

JB said...

Freeman, please.

Californian said...

First, let me say that I do enjoy the sparring with D._Freeman. And I do find that SBPDL is a suitable arena, for a number of reasons.

D._Freeman said: -Your image of "civil" discourse needs some reworking if you have the mind to cite that loud belligerent woman on that UK bus. ...This is and the fact that race realism although viable as a theory simply cannot by itself explain enough concepts involved with the problems of blacks/Africans. ... Strange fruit isnt just a song, and Emmit Till isnt a football player. ...How many black people do you think were killed during the civil rights movment in those "terrorist acts" ... I guess this depends on what you consider race "hustlin" If it is related to the Sharptons, Jacksons, and Farakhans of the world, then if you were paying attention you would see that their power and influence has severely dwindled in the last 15 years, especially among Blacks any level of intelligence. ... But if its the belief and recognition of real disparities in daily life, the workforce, education policy. ...

* OK, a lot was said here. I picked out the example of Emma West, the Englishwoman who got sent to Coventry for sounding off on a tram, because this incident demonstrates how white people -- and in this case, one whose ancestors probably were in Britain for thousands of years -- are being persecuted for stating some obvious truths. The critical thing is not what she said, but the fact that the "British" system was willing to put the hammer on her; compare that to the inability of the "British" police to suppress the recent rioting. Anarcho-tyranny, folks. Thing is, the "British" establishment is using the importation of non-indigenous peoples as an excuse to squash freedom of speech.

* If race realism is not sufficient to explain black disparity in achievement, then what is? Puh-lease give us an explanation that does not include the word "racism." We've seen that one beaten to death. White people in America have given blacks every [expletive deleted] thing they have demanded. Everything! And still it is not working. Give us an alternative, any alternative, which does not mean more demands on white people.

* Re "Strange Fruit" and "Emmett Till:" look at the number of blacks lynched, and who were murdered by whites, during the segregation era. Then give us the number of white people who were murdered by blacks during the same time. Or better, the numbers who have been murdered since the Civil Rights revolution. Yes, we have all heard of Emmett Till, but how many people have heard of Channon Christian and Christopher Newsome? Think any black singers are going to do songs about them? Or Hollywood will make a movie about them?

* As for people killed by the Civil Rights revolution: look at all the death and destruction caused by blacks rioting during the Long Hot Summers of the 1960s. Or in the Rodney King riot. Or less publicized fracases, such as in Cleveland, or the flash mobs, or the gang-banging.

* If race hustlers like the Sharptons are on the decline, then who is taking their place? Can you direct us to any leaders or movement?

...and finally...

* What are these "real disparities in daily life, the workforce, education policy?" And why do they exist when -- again! -- blacks have got everything they have demanded over the last half century?

The thing is, race realism does provide one answer: that the disparities are the result of genetic factors. Now, there may be any number of other factors, but I have yet to see blacks come forth with any kind of reasonable alternatives to demanding more and more and more...

And this is what is driving more white people into what may appear to you the extremist camp.

If you have a better alternative, can you name it?

Zenster said...

D. Freeman: Also, Id like to ask the spectators who they think has more innate natural athletic ability. A football player (of any ethnicity) or a horse jockey/fencer/skeet shooter...

To suck down this forum's resources with all the finesse of a professional fellator and doing so without a response to my total demolition of your assertion regarding any, "difference between Skill and Athleticism and that they don't have a "causal" relationship", only solidifies your disingenuous reputation at SBPDL.

I suppose that I should be content with how you actually managed to successfully execute some HTML font bolding but that just doesn't fill the bill that you have laid out on your own.

As I mentioned:

Pure athletic strength is like an unloaded gun. No matter how well built, the gun [or athlete] cannot perform its task save as a blunt instrument.

Your "innate natural athletic ability" is meaningless without the most basic level of skill. They cannot be decoupled.

Capiche?

Far be it from me to be surprised that a Black man might attempt to center a dispute solely upon the merits of brute strength alone.

Quel mystère!

Zenster said...

Anonymous (December 5, 2011 6:37 PM): Not the vitriolic rhetoric charge again. That one is almost as scary as the racist charge.

I'm shivering in my boots almost as badly as when I got called a [gasp!] "Islamophobe".

Oh, the humanity!

Silent Running said...

But you have to take a longer view, and realize that there's a better chance of success through policy manipulation than there is through sterner measures.

If you were a student of history you would see that I am taking the long view. Blacks have been living among Caucasians for centuries, and what do we have to show for it? A grievance industry and a big pile of white corpses. Most of those were women and children, and a great many were horribly violated before the end. This sort of violence seems to transcend class and social status, so that even the "good ones" are hostile interlopers.

If whites hunted blacks at the same rate blacks hunt whites, there would be very few blacks left in this country, if any.

It's not realistic here in 2011.

In all my years posting on forums, I think this is the most tiresome insinuation: the fallacy of immediacy. To speak seriously of secession is to be for seceding right this minute; to be for border enforcement is to put 12 million people in handcuffs and deport them all tomorrow, as the open-borderites like to screech (Pickett's Charge? Seriously?).

This ain't my first rodeo, boyo. I've stated in many places that secession, and indeed any kind of revolutionary activity, is futile here and now, mostly because the sheep are far too comfortable. The coming economic collapse will change that. Speaking of which, if you have a policy solution for 13% of the population committing well over half the crime, border-jumpers and their "citizen" cousins who think that most of the western US is Mexican property, and probably 100 million fanatically hostile leftists who use your own tax dollars to push socialism, I'm all ears. Tell me how we're going to vote our way out of this mess, professor.

It's funny that you take the "long view" yet you cannot see beyond the framework of the republic. This republic will crumble as all republics must. You live within a bubble of security and it seems you believe that it will last forever. It won't.

Silent Running said...

But remember: crafty, scheming Odysseus made it home alive from the Trojan War. Angry, blustering Ajax and Achilles didn't.

Jesus, you can't even get your folklore straight. Ajax killed himself and Achilles knew he was going to die. You also imply that the "blusterers" were of little worth, but Ajax defended the Greek camp by himself and Achilles was a walking legend. So much for your high-minded comparison. I sincerely hope you didn't have to pay anything for your education.

The irony of this site, is that if you all actually knew some real black people this sight may not need to exist.

And this, dear friends, is why communication between whites and blacks is simply not possible. Blacks actually think that whites live in sealed-off cloisters and mindlessly lash out at some Hollywood caricature of the Negro. I'd wager most folks active on this website have had plenty of experience with blacks. Contact Theory was debunked at least a decade ago.

Anonymous said...

"The irony of this site, is that if you all actually knew some real black people this sight may not need to exist."

Personal experiences with black people IS what brought me to this site.

BTW, racism is NOT a product of ignorance, racism is the product of EXPERIENCE.

Zenster said...

Silent Running: If whites hunted blacks at the same rate blacks hunt whites, there would be very few blacks left in this country, if any.

Great overall comments but the foregoing says it all. We may as well be handing out loaded guns in the ghetto for how much Whites are facilitating their stalkers.

You are absolutely right about both secession along with the enforcement of our borders and deportation of illegal immigrants.

For those that do not think illegal immigrants have anywhere near the negative impact of Blacks, consider this:

Illegal Mexican immigrants are often part of the drug gangs. Gang members frequently get shot during their ongoing turf wars.

Treating a single gunshot wound at an American hospital can cost anywhere into the tens of thousands of dollars. Said patient is just as often then inducted into the legal system and, if they have not murdered someone, usually set free with minimum time served.

Such individuals then go on to repeat multiple enactments of this exact same cycle, each of which can cost us taxpayers, legal expenses included, a solid $50,000 per round.

A single La Familia Michoacana gangster can cost taxpayers upwards of half a million dollars in his, hopefully, short lifetime. None of this includes treatment of victims and all sorts of other indirect costs related to the crimes committed.

Now, multiply that by the deluge of these Mexican gangbangers flooding across our border and you have a much clearer picture of the massive financial drain these thugs pose to average Americans.

Baldowl said...

"Personal experiences with black people IS what brought me to this site."

Bingo. I had nothing against Black people until I actually met some.

D. Freeman said...

@zenster-

Im working on something but i want to get back to this athlete issue quickly.

Answer this question

Can you be born with skill?

Is skill genetic?

Because there is clear evidence that speed, strength, explosiveness, flexibility, and agility are all closely related to genes.

Skill...

Are there any skills that you can innately develop without training?

Can any level of training help a non sub Saharan African attain the ability to enter into the record books of the 100 meter dash? If so then why has it not happened?

Your post in the last blog was so comically fallacious and outright stupid that i ignored it but since we seem to have more of an audience here i figured id get at it. See if some of your peers had the heart to call you out on being intellectually dishonest when arguing any point that you cant really deal with. Lets see if you spell check my post this time.

Every time i mention athleticism you bring up skill and training, but even in your stubbornness you wont really equivocate them to each other.

You are right on one level, Skil and Athleticism have a causal relationship- to ability. As in ability to get open on a pass. Ability to cover a receiver, ability to rush the passer, ability to do whatever. But it takes no real skill to jump high enough to throw a basketball down a hoop. It takes no real skill to push a weighted plate from your chest.

Your analogy about the gun probably seemed like a good idea but you completely screwed yourself with that one.

If athleticism is a gun then would it be fair to say an excellent natural athlete is a high caliber assault rifle? Whereas an average athlete is one of those old school pump action rifles western rifles. Both possess potential energy to maim. And a well trained gunman can probably do more with a slingshot than the average untrained guy of the street can do with an AR15. But the Assault riffle is the primary weapon for the military for a reason.

If skill and training were all that was needed to produce prowess in sports than Jordy Nelson would not be such a rarity, not just in the fact that he is a good "athletic" NFL receiver, but in the fact that he runs a sub 4.5 forty yard dash and has a near 40 inch vertical. See you cannot train speed or explosiveness to the point where it actually equals what more natural athletes do naturally. And any training you do will be quickly eroded by time and age. Something else that rushton and entide point out. Look up the story of Adam Archuletta and how he committed himself to unique training to develop speed and athleticism to compete with other more "natural" athletes. In summation it worked and he was a star in the NFL for about 5 years and then his physical talent eroded. Why? Well according to Rushton he didnt have the testosterone levels to maintain the unnatural level of athleticism that he attained.

I point out again that J phillipe Rushton, one of the most seminal figures in "race realism theory" along with many other scientist and researchers have consistently pointed out that Blacks are more prone to higher forms of Athleticism. Now you can bring up skill, training, sports, and whatever else. You can change the subject to Mike vick or Ndamakun Suh or whatever, but you cannot "demolish" that point. All you can do is straw man it and bring up different ways that athleticism can manifest itself, but you cant destroy it because it is correct.

Or you can ask that I go away with all that truth as one of your peers asked. Are you willing to state that Rushton was incorrect with his assessment of African people? If this is the case, is it possible that he doesnt know what he is talking about? Man that would throw a lot of things out of whack wouldn't it?

Anonymous said...

"Also, Id like to ask the spectators who they think has more innate natural athletic ability. A football player (of any ethnicity) or a horse jockey/fencer/skeet shooter..."

A horse jockey. Making the 7 stone 7 pounds flat limit or 10 stone 7 pounds fences limit takes effort.

Compare this to Ndamukong Suh trying to walk to the sidelines and standing on an opponent, the player so clumsy he could not run without making contact with the defensve player on three separate occasions, Charlie Pettigrew so unathletic that his hand fell into the referees chest.

WOOOO! Go Detroit with your super afleets! WOOOO!

Zenster said...

D. Freeman: Can you be born with skill?

If not skill directly, certainly the precursors of it.

There is now emerging evidence of a genetic link to "supertasters. Their ability to detect an extremely bitter substance know as PROP (n-6 propylthiouracfl), is a strong indicator that they may have superior talents as a chef.

As we unravel the human genome, it is expected that many other of these gene-based precursors will begin to appear.

Is skill genetic?

Again, preliminary indications are positive. A study if eye color by Louisville University professor Joanna Rowe indicates that:

… those with blue ones are likely to achieve more in life than their peers as they tend to study more effectively and perform better in exams, says a study conducted by US scientists. The study did not mention anything about people with black irises.

The tests showed that brown-eyed people had faster reaction time, but those with lighter eyes appeared to be better strategic thinkers.

Brown-eyed people succeeded in activities such as football and hockey, but lighter-eyed participants proved to be more successful in activities that required skills in time structuring and planning such as golf, cross-country running and studying for exams, the scientists said.
[emphasis added]

All of which would go a long way towards explaining why White people are so good at building civilizations. That "time structuring and planning" is directly related to such cornerstones as forecasting, spatial orientation and even such pivotal aspects as deferred gratification. This might also provide some explanation for the notoriously poor "impulse control" exhibited by Blacks.

Dark colored eyes tend to absorb more light as it passes through them, there by reducing the amount of non-image related illumination (i.e., glare). While this confers better visual acuity, lighter colored eyes admit more light in general and are able to see more colors. Again, something that explains the dearth of Black Old Masters. (Old Massahs?)

If athleticism is a gun then would it be fair to say an excellent natural athlete is a high caliber assault rifle?

No. Not necessarily at all. My analogy dealt with quality of construction, not barrel diameter. Why am I not surprised you would try to steer things in that direction?

A well-bedded and properly centerlined .22 caliber rifle can have better accuracy and, therefore, more killing power at a distance than a badly assembled AR-15. In fact, .22s are also a preferred close quarters killing weapon for espionage operatives due to how the slug tends to ricochet around inside the skull or body and cause more damage with less attention-getting noise. Higher caliber loads can send the slug entirely through a body with less resulting damage or fatalities.

But the Assault riffle is the primary weapon for the military for a reason.

Yes, but not for the reason you cite. It is more a matter of reliability and versatility, not firepower.

The M4 Carbine is a converted M-16 semi-automatic rifle and the most common weapon in the SF inventory. The M4 features a collapsible stock and is readily adaptable to accommodate scopes, night vision apparatuses and add-ons such as grenade launchers (left, M203) or even shotguns.

This is why I cited pentathletes. Their versatility of combined overall ability and athleticism makes them far more adaptable, like the M-4, than any linebacker or guard.

[to be continued]

Zenster said...

Now you can bring up skill, training, sports, and whatever else. You can change the subject to Mike vick or Ndamakun Suh or whatever, but you cannot "demolish" that point.

Rubbish. My point still stands that without preliminary skills ― ones that appear to be quite heritable ― no amount of "explosiveness" or "speed" will compensate for a lack of eye-hand coordination or balance.

I think that this goes a long way towards why Paul Kersey writes so extensively about sports. Simple raw strength will never overcome in-depth strategy.

Another article on eye color even points out how:

Self-paced activities have been defined as those requiring a response made at a time chosen by the respondent when the situation remains relatively static such as bowling, golf, pitching a baseball, or tossing a ball at a target. Reactive activities are those requiring a quick response to a rapidly changing stimulus such as boxing, defensive football position, hitting a baseball, or rotary pursuit.

What would you rather have, a baseball team topheavy with sluggers and poor piss poor pitching or one with superb pitching and mediocre batting?

It's hard to score if you can't get on base. All of this is why I continue to posit that skills and intelligence outweigh athleticism. As the old saying goes:

"Old age and treachery will overcome youth and vigor every time."

Of course, none of that changes how collegiate and professional sports have all bought heavily into the "Black-style" of play. This, despite the fact that Doug Williams of the Washington Redskins was the only black quarterback ever to win a Super Bowl (1988).

Anonymous said...

Freeman, please learn to be succinct, you're wasting space and flogging a dead horse. This debate played itself out here months ago, the regulars here were fairly split, but ultimately no one's opinion was changed.
Check out Whiskey's blog, his position (and mine) is the same as yours.

D. Freeman said...

@zenster

Although i don't require you to acknowledge this as it is still quite obvious, you are still talking about things involving training, practice, etc and not about innate athleticism.

If not skill directly, certainly the precursors of it.

I would call the precursors to skill in most contact/physical sports ATHLETICISM

There is now emerging evidence of a genetic link to "supertasters. Their ability to detect an extremely bitter substance know as PROP (n-6 propylthiouracfl), is a strong indicator that they may have superior talents as a chef.

So what you are saying is that someone who is born with an innate ability might have certain genetic traits that may make them naturally talented at a certain activity. Like a guy who has good hip flexibility and great explosiveness might be good at running with a ball, or running in a straight line for a short distance? Furthermore those born without those genes would have to work extra hard to get to the same standards or develop different skills to even things out. But what if the naturally talented guy can develop the same skills?

...All of which would go a long way towards explaining why White people are so good at building civilizations.

Makes perfect sense to me. Is it fair to say that genetics and evolution can go a long way toward explaining how culture develops. Considering that thousands of years ago most caucasions developed in highly hostile environments is it not fair to hypothesize that they developed better minds for strategy, "delayed gratification" civilization building etc as a mechanism to survive in such a climate? Or, considering the relatively bountiful environment of Africa that athletic prowess would be more valuable, and instant gratification (like having a large family) came with less consequences considering the wealth of the land? Considering that the first whites were essentially Africans that migrated North is it not possible that they eventually shed their "negroid" genes if favor of "Caucasoid" ones that would be more suitable for their environment? I tell you I may not like the ramifications of what he says but that Rushton guy is on to something. Its a shame that its main use seems to be for promoting white supremacy.

Yes, but not for the reason you cite. It is more a matter of reliability and versatility, not firepower.

Wouldn't innately superior athleticism make you more versatile at most contact style sports? Is it so outlandish to think that a coach when faced with a marginally athletic white kid and a supremely athletic black kid will take the black kid 99% of the time in hopes that he is more Andre Johnson than Terrel Owens? Or should he just limit his expectations and go with Blair white?

This is why I cited pentathletes. Their versatility of combined overall ability and athleticism makes them far more adaptable, like the M-4, than any linebacker or guard.

yes but the Pentathlete has that versatility based off of training. The M-4 is made to be versatile. You are dealing with a faulty equivocation here in this analogy. We are talking about innate athleticism from birth not trained skills.

It's hard to score if you can't get on base. All of this is why I continue to posit that skills and intelligence outweigh athleticism.

Ah you lost some love here because this is basically a cop out lie. We were not talking about what was more important skill or athleticism, we were arguing whether or not they were essentially the same thing and whether it was logical to believe that whites were born with the same level of athletic ability as whites as a basis for Kersy's opinions on discrimination in sports. As I eroded your position with logic and evidence from your own expert you began to slowly change course. Which you likely recognize hence the much more civil tone of your last response.

At least you are being intellectually honest with your misdirection.

continued...

D. Freeman said...

I think that this goes a long way towards why Paul Kersey writes so extensively about sports. Simple raw strength will never overcome in-depth strategy.

I save this one for last because it speaks directly to the folly of this site's underlying "goals."

First and foremost, the sports analogy for "BRA" simply doesn't work. By your own implicit word, the words of your "experts" on genetics, and the real life results, you can see why most coaches would take a chance with a supreme athlete over going for a marginal athlete.

If there are more naturally talented Black Athletes than white athletes then you cannot cry discrimination.

Sure there are plenty of Vick's and Pac Man Jones's out there, but there are a ton more high level athletes that dont get in trouble and play up to their ability. In fact, THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEM DO!.

So considering the rarity of a Jordy Nelson, and the higher potential of the average black athlete Vs. the average white athlete, how could discrimination and racism be honestly used to explain the rise of black athletes in America's popular sports? It just doesnt hold water. It is in fact the biggest argument AGAINST a lot of the nonsense on this site.

Since enforcing the Rooney rule and providing more Blacks with opportunities to coach, we have seen Black coaches thrive, two have won super bowls and four are headed to the playoffs as we speak. How is this a microcosm of black people being unnaturally "propped up" by DWLs?

Lastly, as i stated before the game has changed due to demand. the game has changed because competition and people demanded it. They want to see big plays, big hits, and supreme athleticism. The freak athletes are why Football and basketball are more popular than Baseball. And far more popular than Hockey, the winter olympics and many other non contact less athletic sports. The coaches want to stay competitive so the game evolves as the players get bigger faster, stronger and by proxy Blacker.

This is just not the lane for Kersy, its clear from the negative response that the audience is not feeling it because the recognize it as invalid. They want to be able to come here and complain about black on white crime and other cherry picked stories not be faced with a faulty analogy that ironically helps illustrate that their world view is full of falsehood.

Anonymous said...

"They want to be able to come here and complain about black on white crime and other cherry picked stories not be faced with a faulty analogy that ironically helps illustrate that their world view is full of falsehood."

Freeman, I'm mostly on your side in the sports debate, but you piss away your credibility by ending with this laugher.

Your inability to comprehend the amazing popularity of this site is likely a limitation of your lesser intelligence, combined with your serial victim mentality, common among blacks.

Zenster said...

I'm beginning to see why this dispute is irreconcilable.

For me, the topic is professional athletics, regardless of my pentathlon reference.

While "natural athleticism" might win any "given" game, such brute force is not going to win tournaments on any sort of a regular basis. A comprehensive knowledge of strategy is needed for that. It would be my guess as the reason for why there has never been a winning all-Black team in any of the modern professional sports.

Explosiveness, endurance and all those other physical traits will not win consistently against a mixed field.

If it were only a matter of who possessed greater strength and stamina, then that might apply.

Baseball, football and basketball each have a specific strategy and a thorough knowledge of that can be a serious force multiplier. Just as with military combat which, to one extent or another, all sports recreate.

If your only requirement is to win one game, maybe then brute strength will carry the day. Otherwise, mental agility, not just physical agility, is more of a priority.

Again, why has there been only one Black quarterback to win a Super Bowl? That statistic doesn't remotely reflect the percentage of Black players in football.

White players have successfully filled all positions on the field in these various sports. The same cannot be said with respect to a proportionate representation of Blacks in those same positions.

Paul's extensive coverage of collegiate sports has convinced me of one thing:

Moneyball is killing professional sports with "Black-style" play leading the charge. It is the "win-at-all-costs" mentality writ large. Dynasty teams are, evidently, a thing of the past as modern pursuit is apparently focused upon winning the very next game and not much else.

Silent Running said...

To suck down this forum's resources with all the finesse of a professional fellator...

Thanks for painting that picture, Zenster. I didn't want to sleep tonight anyway.

Great overall comments but the foregoing says it all. We may as well be handing out loaded guns in the ghetto for how much Whites are facilitating their stalkers.

Many thanks, both for the compliment and the interesting writeup on genetics.

No. Not necessarily at all. My analogy dealt with quality of construction, not barrel diameter. Why am I not surprised you would try to steer things in that direction?

LMAO!

P.S. Did Anon Milquetoast abandon the discussion? Say it ain't so.

Anonymous said...

Silent Running sez: "Jesus, you can't even get your folklore straight."

You sure you want to play with me in the deep end of the pool, chuckles? Think fast!

"Ajax killed himself and Achilles knew he was going to die."

Aias, as you may recall from I guess your coloring-book version, indeed killed himself... out of _blinding anger and pride_. Remember? The sort of thing that I was actually talking about?

As for Achilles, like you say he 'knew he was going to die' but it's rather beside the point if you can think for a minute and relate one concept to another. What is the tonic, what is the theme, of the Iliad? Why it's put there in the very first two lines...

"The anger of Achilles, doomed and RUINOUS."

In case you can't tell, I'm slightly improving on Fitzgerald's metrics, here. You want me to give it to you in the Greek, chuckles? Learn how to spot a theme. Learn to know your opponent. Better yet, just learn your feckin place, boy.

"You also imply that the "blusterers" were of little worth"

No, _you_ simply state that, and then you impute that I imply it. Read for meaning, it'll help you get better test scores than those blacks you so despise.

"I sincerely hope you didn't have to pay anything for your education."

Keep 'em coming, chuckles, and we'll see who invested (not paid) what, for an education.

"If you were a student of history you would see that I am taking the long view."

I spoke of the present going forward, you speak of the past going backward. Again, who's the student?

"the fallacy of immediacy."

From this, I'm not sure you know what a fallacy is, and certainly not 'immediacy'. You're not thinking clearly and you're certainly not reading clearly... and you know why that is?

The Rage of Silent Running, "doomed and ruinous."

Trust me, ephebe, you want me and my type on your side. Be a little more circumspect in the future, and maybe you'll win me over.

D. Freeman said...

^...is it ok to say pwned here? "Moderate" anon, check out my posts in the upper most thread (right now at least) see what you think about my statements on capitalism.

Anyway@ zen

This dispute is not irreconcilable.

You are just not participating fully in it. If you want to (now) argue that phsyical ability will lose out to skill, training and strategy, then youve got it. Im not disputing that

The dispute here was on the validity of Kersy's arguments of discrimination against white athletes. Ive now thoroughly proven that said argument has no merit based upon the fact that White athletes are measurably, genetically, and scientifically proven to be generally inferior to black athletes outside of certain outlyers. football/basketball rely on athletic prowess more than most other sports. Its that simple.

Now to as to why there has only been 1 black QB to win a superbowl. Well part of that is becuase there have not been that many black QBs.

The other part interestingly is still reflective of Rushtons theories. I have seen with my very eyes that players with supreme athletic ability dont learn the same habits of training, studying, and practice for those who have marginal athletic ability. One example is tracy Mcgrady who i believe is now retired. McGrady was a phenom with supreme athletic ability. But all he wanted to do was dunk and out run people to the basket. Defense, offensive strategy, finesse, etc those things were not worked on and as his body began to fail him he swiftly degenerated into mediocrity as a player.

Doug Williams himself was no more athletic than the typical white QB. Which is why he learned to play the game better. In some ways you could argue that superior athleticism in the wrong hands could be a great hinderance to ability. There are many NFL players with supreme athleticism that cannot learn the game. But there are more who have it and can. Those guys (who are usually black) are the coveted players for a reason.

Anonymous said...

"Now to as to why there has only been 1 black QB to win a superbowl. Well part of that is becuase there have not been that many black QBs."

Because blacks tend to be less intelligent.

Your inability to see this is matched by white inability to see that blacks are better running backs and wide receivers.

This debate is old and tired, you are wasting your time, you are not going to change anyone's mind.

Zenster said...

D. Freeman: The dispute here was on the validity of Kersy's arguments of discrimination against white athletes.

You have just demonstrated an appreciation of Paul Kersey's writing about collegiate football that is so superficial as to make Paris Hilton look like Mother Theresa.

Discrimination is just a tiny part of Paul's overarching raison in all of this.

If Paul feels like stepping in and pimp slapping you back into the outer fringes reality, that's his privilege. I'll not waste anymore of my time on it.

Silent Running said...

Milquetoast,

You sure you want to play with me in the deep end of the pool, chuckles? Think fast!

Such erudition! I must have struck a nerve with the remark about education.

No, _you_ simply state that, and then you impute that I imply it.

Here is your quote:

I know people here are angry, and it makes sense to be angry. But remember: crafty, scheming Odysseus made it home alive from the Trojan War. Angry, blustering Ajax and Achilles didn't.

This is a wagging of the finger, an admonishment to keep our heads which, after so many references to "venting" and letting off steam, is at least consistent with your overall thrust. Indeed, you've reiterated this in your latest response: "blinding anger and pride" is what motivated Ajax and Achilles. Your purpose on this forum was to chide the rest of us out of a worldview you saw as unnecessarily divisive and ultimately counter-productive. But now you'd rather those words not possess their obvious meaning, so you must employ the intellectual tap-dance you undoubtedly learned from your buck buddies.

Just as the Greeks would have been swept from the shores of Troas immediately had it not been for Ajax and Achilles, so will White Survival be swept from the shores of BRA without righteous anger and all it entails.

In case you can't tell, I'm slightly improving on Fitzgerald's metrics, here.

Here we have the Master's Thesis version of prick-waiving.

Trust me, ephebe, you want me and my type on your side. Be a little more circumspect in the future, and maybe you'll win me over.

Actually, there are plenty of your type out there already: centrist, effete, thoroughly gelded, desperately after the approval of Stone Age peoples. I'm very well-acquainted with you, even if the reverse isn't so. Here's your final lesson for today, Caspar: it is the small, highly motivated minority which moves the majority, every time. When and if we are successful in taking back the West from savage interlopers, you will follow us gladly, and will wonder that you ever saw otherwise than exactly how we see.

Now that we've dispensed with that nonsense, you can answer the questions I posed to you previously. I know someone with as much integrity as you have wouldn't duck an honest question, so I assume you must have missed it. I'll repost it here for your convenience:

Speaking of which, if you have a policy solution for 13% of the population committing well over half the crime, border-jumpers and their "citizen" cousins who think that most of the western US is Mexican property, and probably 100 million fanatically hostile leftists who use your own tax dollars to push socialism, I'm all ears. Tell me how we're going to vote our way out of this mess, professor.

Anonymous said...

Silent Running --

In reply to you, I've begun a series of long comments which will seek to answer the questions you asked. The first two comments will appear below this one, Kersey permitting.

Honor demands that I begin the first one by giving you a bit of a fisking, but don't take it too hard, it's just required, given what you said about me. Read it, swallow it, get past it, move on to the next posts, and then let's put all the Hatfield and McCoy stuff behind us and talk like grownups. Snark is fun, but it's a waste of time for us both.

In the next post I begin my answer with a few definitions as to where I'm coming from. The posts to come will talk practical specifics, but I've written quite a bit for the moment, and will probably not return for another day or two.

Good huntin'.

-- Moderate Milquetoast Guy

Anonymous said...

General George S. Silent Running sez: “I'm all ears.”

Well that’s good to hear, because I’m going to answer your questions, nice and slow and at length. By the way, thanks for re-posting your “honest” question (I’ll grant ye that much) at the end of your latest tantrum. I do admit, it got lost in the thicket of your previous mutton-headed prose, so I’m glad you pointed it out.

“Tell me how we're going to vote our way out of this mess, professor.”

Okay. Before I get into it, I want to remind you that I’ve been talking about policy choices. If you think policy in this country is made just by voting, then… hoo boy, let’s just skip over that part.

This is going to take a while, so I’m going to comment in at least two separate comments, possibly more, to keep them at readable length. Strap yourself in, chuckles, this is gonna be a haul.

But first…

Our little “Robin Hood vs. Little John” ritual-combat test-of-mettle thingy is drawing to a ludicrous close, so that we can get down to the real business of talking seriously about common ground. But it isn’t quite over yet, I’m afraid; you’ve earned yourself another good slapping, chuckles, and I’ll be durned but you’re going to get it. It’s for your own good. Granted you’re a stalwart and that’s good; but you don’t think very clearly, and you need to start doing that, and stop being so reductivist, if you want to have success. Which, by the way, I want you to have. My whole point is that I don’t think you’re going to find success in the direction you’re advocating.

First I’m going to demonstrate what a rhetorical coward you are. If you can’t even conduct an honest little bit of arm-wrestling on the internet, how are you ever going to lead your troops into battle against the Dark Hordes?

The General sez: “Such erudition! …Here we have the Master's Thesis version of prick-waiving. (sic)”

Um… let’s review. Without provocation from me, you shifted into ad hominem gear, you questioned my grasp of the classics, and then you insulted my education. I replied by demonstrating my knowledge of the classics, my familiarity with their translations, and intimated that once upon a time, in a galaxy far, far away, I read the classical authors in the original languages (yes, I used the plural). I did this not to show off, but merely to show you that you’re barking up the wrong tree with those sorts of accusations.

In the face of this evidence, you simply retreated to the sort of schoolyard taunting of “Look at Poindexter Pointy-head, ooh he’s such a smartypants!”

You challenged me, so I smacked you down. Take it like a man, instead of whimpering more insults as you run away. Lookit, I don’t really care about this tit-for-tat stuff. But I’ve been trying to make a point here that I think is constructive, and when you try to undermine my point with this sort of yapping, you’re gonna get a rolled-up newspaper on the nose. Not for my own ego, but because your yapping undermines my point if I let it stand unopposed.

You want to argue with me, that’s fine, let’s argue the real issues, and stop this schoolyard stuff.

Anonymous said...

(Hmm, have to break this up into smaller bites than I thought. Anyway I'm not quite done with my riposte, before we get down to grownup business. There's a little bit more...)

As I was saying to Colonel Silent Running...

Besides, who was being the nit-picky showoff? My original Odysseus comparison was simply made in the context of White Survival, which you say is your concern: Odysseus survived and had children, and lived to see his homeland, and drove out the parasites who were bleeding it dry. The other two didn’t.

Odysseus chose a strategy that actually secured his survival. (Oh and by the way, he’s the one who also won the war.) That’s the salient point of a very simple and compact metaphor, but you had to go and torture it with over-explication just to prove you Know Better. Huh, fancy that.

You talk about the vital contribution of Achilles, and to a degree you’re right, but here’s the opening of the poem: “Achilles’ anger, doomed and ruinous, /THAT CAUSED THE ACHAEANS LOSS ON BITTER LOSS,/…LEAVING SO MANY DEAD MEN…”

That point will be germane to my larger argument later; keep it in mind.

The General sez: “I'm very well-acquainted with you, even if the reverse isn't so.”

Actually what I’m showing here is that you’re not at all acquainted with me. Don’t know why you should be, it’s just the internet after all, but I also don’t know why you’d claim such a thing.

The Bold General sez: “I must have struck a nerve with the remark about education.”

Trust me, chuckles, you couldn’t find one of my nerves if I gave you a map. I’m not on this site chest-thumping and giving myself silly monikers (if you like, Milquetoast Boy suits me just fine), I’m trying to argue a position that I think advances the cause of White Survival better than the alternatives.

You don’t have to believe anything you read on the internet from some milquetoast like me, so go right ahead and disbelieve me when I tell you that there’s nothing I need to prove to myself or anybody else, personally or professionally. I’m quite secure in my achievements, which are pretty damn substantial in nature (and I’m not talking about Tenured Professor of Liberal Nonsense, either). If anything I stand to lose by coming here, given how this society is run.

I really don’t get any ego boost from arguing on the internet; I’m here to argue because I think the game is worth the candle. Ask yourself: do I sound like an illiterate to you? Do I really?

Enough of this. It isn’t the point at all, but the law of the streets commands that if you smack me, I’d better smack you back so you won’t forget it. My point is to show you that if you were wrong about my education, and wrong about my supposedly fragile ego, then maybe you’re wrong about my motives and my “intellectual tap-dance” and so forth too. I’m here to talk seriously.

Look, now that I’ve scored sufficient hits to satisy my obligation I’m going to extend a hand, and buy you a drink. Let’s not have any more of this foolishness. There’s work to be done. I happen to think you're mistaken about the sort of work that's necessary, and I’m here to talk about that with you. That’s for the next post.

COMING UP NEXT: HOW TO DO IT

Zenster said...

It looks like FAMU's marching band has its tit in the Bendix.