Get 15% Off + Free Shipping on Orders over $150 - Use Code: EPICSUMMER
December 29, 2010 @ 06:37 PM
FlamingBible

Post: 129

Join Date: Dec 2010

By the words you have chosen to use, you have indeed come to the conclusion that these two minority groups, Blacks and Hispanics, have "negatively brought American society down." The only thing you are unsure about is which group has "brought it down" the most.

You seem to have missed the rest of my response. I do not know whether you did not read it or you are unwilling to respond to it, either way, I have reposted it below on the off chance that you are willing to answer it. Please tell me if you are unwilling to respond so I can give up on this conversation.

My previous response which you may have missed:

"The question you are asking is not simple and cannot be answered in a simple way. You are being disingenuous if you say it is...You cannot intelligently answer it without knowing how you define "hindering" or without taking into account the history and social statuses of Black and Hispanic Americans. Believe it or not, things that happened in the past affect things that happen in the present...define what you mean, or rephrase your question in a more approachable manner..."

tl;dr

Please tell me how you define the terms in your question, specifically, what exactly you mean by "hinder" and "progress", OR rephrase your question to make it more approachable, for example, maybe what you actually want to ask is, "Which minority group, Blacks or Hispanics, have higher rates of poverty and are more disenfranchised?"


The question states: Who is holding America back? Hindrance is defined as a thing that provides resistance, delay, or obstruction to something or someone. Progress is defined as a movement toward a goal or to a further or higher stage. The prime reason to leave my question ambiguous in nature is to conjure intellectual debate if one finds fault in it.
December 29, 2010 @ 06:39 PM

Inactive

The question states: Who is holding America back? Hindrance is defined as a thing that provides resistance, delay, or obstruction to something or someone. Progress is defined as a movement toward a goal or to a further or higher stage. The prime reason to leave my question ambiguous in nature is to conjure intellectual debate if one finds fault in it.


thats interesting
December 29, 2010 @ 06:41 PM
FlamingBible

Post: 129

Join Date: Dec 2010

FlamingBible, No1Collector has basically undermined the shaky foundation upon which your original questions rests, and you're dismissing his points. Arrogance.

The effects of a
December 29, 2010 @ 06:50 PM

Inactive

This isn't an inclusive/exclusive dilemma. The compilation of negativities caused by these two races which have been studied in great numbers COULD one day prescribe a combative measure.


So you're saying that the government will attack the black and hispanic communities for perceived negativities ? It already happens.

This is not to congregate certain actions as partial or impartial, the intent is off the basis of percentiles.


What does this mean? So you're basing it off things that can be quantified into variables?
December 30, 2010 @ 12:17 AM
no1collector

Post: 506

Join Date: Oct 2008

Location: The Great State of T...

The question states: Who is holding America back? Hindrance is defined as a thing that provides resistance, delay, or obstruction to something or someone. Progress is defined as a movement toward a goal or to a further or higher stage. The prime reason to leave my question ambiguous in nature is to conjure intellectual debate if one finds fault in it.


What is being hindered?
What should the country be progressing toward?

The problem with your question is BECAUSE it is so ambiguous. An ambiguous question will only lead to ambiguous answers, or even worse, answers that are dangerously over-simplified. So am I to assume that your question can have no right or wrong answers and is more of an exercise in theory? Regardless, I will try to answer your question in the way I understand it.

Your premise, as I understand it, is that there is a certain "racial" group "hindering" America from "progressing" towards something. Since you have not defined what is being hindered and what America is progressing towards, then I will have to assume and use my own concepts.

I will say that progress is: a smaller gap between the rich and poor, improved public education, relaxed drug laws, a higher minimum wage, taxes determined by income, universal healthcare, a better regulated financial sector, campaign finance reform, and reduced military spending.

Those examples of progress I listed are being hindered because proposals supporting those initiatives are constantly out voted and most of the people in power who can affect these changes do not want them or actively work against them.

A larger majority of White Americans vote than do Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians combined. Most of the people who vote against, and hinder, these progressive reforms tend to be older, White, conservative, Christian Americans. Also, most of those people who hold enough power and influence to affect these changes are in the top 10% of the income bracket, most of whom are also White and often actively work against these progressive reforms.

Therefore, because a larger majority of White Americans vote against these reforms and actively work against them, those that are "hindering" American "progress" the most are older, White, conservative, Christian Americans.
December 30, 2010 @ 01:22 AM
gnar

Post: 1545

Join Date: Oct 2009

Location: Vegas

^ Nailed it.

Thread creator might have to add "white people." But, of course, white people wasn't an option in which he sought fit, due unexplained biases. That's not the answer he wanted, we know this. But, again, I couldn't agree more with the post above me.
December 30, 2010 @ 01:30 AM
gnar

Post: 1545

Join Date: Oct 2009

Location: Vegas

One simple thing to look at - anyone with any real analytical skills - will want to ask and know on why are those numbers like that. It seems that he made a very poor assumption, or at least I think, that these selective groups that he alienated are doing it to themselves. That they are purposely trying to "hold back America." I believe he is unable, or unwilling, to seek that reason because it is one that points to a plutocratic, underlining racist society that is ran by the white, Christian, conservative, elitists and how they don't really work to create economic, racial, and class equality.
December 30, 2010 @ 05:49 AM
FlamingBible

Post: 129

Join Date: Dec 2010

One simple thing to look at - anyone with any real analytical skills - will want to ask and know on why are those numbers like that. It seems that he made a very poor assumption, or at least I think, that these selective groups that he alienated are doing it to themselves. That they are purposely trying to "hold back America." I believe he is unable, or unwilling, to seek that reason because it is one that points to a plutocratic, underlining racist society that is ran by the white, Christian, conservative, elitists and how they don't really work to create economic, racial, and class equality.


You seem to have a vendetta against the white man. Obviously, inequalities do exist across America; to deny this is asinine. To assume that out of nowhere the world or America in this regard will be at some sort of euphoric state is naive, given the social and economic (race and gender) disparities of the past. Another conjecture you have made is your attempt to defame by stating this inquiry is a one-sided argue; that was not my intent at all.

If you truly believe that the constitutional foundation this country was built on has now turned into a plutocratic state, I don't how to respond towards such an extreme ideology. Yes, shit happened in the past that still causes recurrences in racial differences but I would say our country has made great steps in rectifying these aberrations at least to a moderate scale.
December 30, 2010 @ 05:54 AM
FlamingBible

Post: 129

Join Date: Dec 2010

What is being hindered?
What should the country be progressing toward?

The problem with your question is BECAUSE it is so ambiguous. An ambiguous question will only lead to ambiguous answers, or even worse, answers that are dangerously over-simplified. So am I to assume that your question can have no right or wrong answers and is more of an exercise in theory? Regardless, I will try to answer your question in the way I understand it.

Your premise, as I understand it, is that there is a certain "racial" group "hindering" America from "progressing" towards something. Since you have not defined what is being hindered and what America is progressing towards, then I will have to assume and use my own concepts.

I will say that progress is: a smaller gap between the rich and poor, improved public education, relaxed drug laws, a higher minimum wage, taxes determined by income, universal healthcare, a better regulated financial sector, campaign finance reform, and reduced military spending.

Those examples of progress I listed are being hindered because proposals supporting those initiatives are constantly out voted and most of the people in power who can affect these changes do not want them or actively work against them.

A larger majority of White Americans vote than do Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians combined. Most of the people who vote against, and hinder, these progressive reforms tend to be older, White, conservative, Christian Americans. Also, most of those people who hold enough power and influence to affect these changes are in the top 10% of the income bracket, most of whom are also White and often actively work against these progressive reforms.

Therefore, because a larger majority of White Americans vote against these reforms and actively work against them, those that are "hindering" American "progress" the most are older, White, conservative, Christian Americans.


Progress=status quo
December 30, 2010 @ 10:23 AM
no1collector

Post: 506

Join Date: Oct 2008

Location: The Great State of T...

Progress=status quo


Then if maintaining the status quo is your definition of progress, it would make sense for Black, Hispanic, Asian, and poor, White Americans to work against it. The status quo does not support the interests of Blacks, Hispanics, Asians, or the poor.

In your response to GNAR, you seem to state that an ideal utopia where everyone is equal is impossible and there will always be some kind of discrimination, therefore, the status quo might as well be maintained. Am I right in this assumption?

I think it is helpful to point out that the only constant in this world is change. Although we may never see a truly just and equal society (unless we finally get robots and genetic engineering down), I believe that it is better to always work towards that goal than to sit back and maintain the status quo.

I personally believe that the people who want to maintain the status quo are just afraid. Afraid that maybe, once all the benefits of the status quo are stripped away and the playing field is even, they will discover that all the ideas of their "superiority" and "specialness" are just dreams. Maybe they are afraid of finding out that they are not superior, special, or different from anyone else. Maybe they are afraid, of finding out that they are average, upright walking apes, just like everyone else.
December 30, 2010 @ 02:13 PM
gnar

Post: 1545

Join Date: Oct 2009

Location: Vegas

You seem to have a vendetta against the white man. Obviously, inequalities do exist across America; to deny this is asinine. To assume that out of nowhere the world or America in this regard will be at some sort of euphoric state is naive, given the social and economic (race and gender) disparities of the past. Another conjecture you have made is your attempt to defame by stating this inquiry is a one-sided argue; that was not my intent at all.

If you truly believe that the constitutional foundation this country was built on has now turned into a plutocratic state, I don't how to respond towards such an extreme ideology. Yes, shit happened in the past that still causes recurrences in racial differences but I would say our country has made great steps in rectifying these aberrations at least to a moderate scale.


No hatred at all. Discontent, yeah, but I understand the world has worked like this for a few thousand years. There is always a group that wants to maintain power and they'll do so in many ways. By force, politics, manipulation, or many other ways.

But, by no means do I think that if the U.S. isn't totally equal, as a utopian communist society, then it's a failure. But things could be much better, especially as a country that claims to be the greatest in the world. I don't want to go into a U.S. bashing session but there are many other "equal" countries (I'm sure we can agree on my vague use of 'equal'), more so within Scandinavian Europe, that have created a culture where the standard of living is phenomenal, for anyone.

Sure, progress has been made here (after slavery, Jim Crow, lending, and so many other oppressive acts committed by the people in power - as soon as 30 to 35 years ago), in the U.S., this is expression or view shared by many whites ("But look where we have came from!" Give me a fucking break), but to act like this is where the U.S. should be in equality standards is absurd, especially for a country that claims to be the greatest in the world.

You honestly conclude that minorities, that just barely were given "alienable rights" a half a lifetime ago, should be where whites are in terms of standards of living with whites? And then to look at these statistics face value, assuming that this is all their fault? Even with all of the underlining racist laws that existed after the civil rights movements and some to this day? After the 500 or so years that the colonial world did to blacks and Hispanics, that you think 30 - 40 years is enough to blame them and claiming that they are holding America back? That's a logical assumption? That, to me, is a naive notion.

Out of any industrialized nation, we are among the lowest in wealth distribution (inform me if you are unaware and I could provide some statistics), and especially after this recession, created by the rich, white collar elites, it is actually increasing this very moment. So, tell me, how my radical notion of claiming that our society is a plutocracy is a "radical" one. Honestly, you would either just have to be unaware at who controls, runs, and profits off of our nation, or just don't want to believe that we're a nation ran by wealthy elites.

The premise of this thread should be 'what is causing this inequality of minorities that seems to be hold them back?'
December 30, 2010 @ 05:21 PM
Specialzed

Post: 41

Join Date: Dec 2010

Whites are holding america back.

/thread.
December 30, 2010 @ 06:25 PM
NoStress

Post: 2071

Join Date: Sep 2010

Location: Shaolin

fear of a black planet

burr


Please login first to reply.
Back To Top