Norsemaiden said:
Blacks should be seperate from Whites and live geographically isolated. They should do things for themselves without either aid or exploitation by any other race. The white race has done a lot more aiding than exploiting.
I didn't see any mention in Infoterror's post about Liberia. As I understand it Liberia was given to the freed African American slaves. It is a fertile land with much potential for people there to live a free and peaceful life. They could not achieve this due to some unfortunately predictabe savage behaviour.
Now that is absolutely biased (which I expect) and ignorant, which is sad.
1. The "white race" has in many countries past, enslaved black people for labor purposes, granting them no rights, and
exploiting them for profit.
2. Conversely, in recent years black nationalist groups have
exploited minority affirmation laws to unbalance fair trade and employment. To grant a black man a job simply because he is a black man, and deny a white man for this reason, is to suggest that the black man for some reason
needs this aid in employment, and is therefore inferior to the white man.
It is racist to have such laws, and as such I disagree with the mentality of "black nationalists" and "black power" groups. For the very same reason, I also find "white power" and "white nationalism" equally plebian and self-righteous.
In regards to Liberia (A country named for "Liberty" ironically enough), the United States grants former slaves a piece of land they do not even possess in Africa, provides transportation and a very limited supply of resources, and then forgets them. These slaves, who have little education, and lived a majority of their lives in slave labor, had no experience whatsoever being "masters" of their own destiny. They knew only how to serve and obey, and when that was taken, they were lost. I am not advocating slavery, but depicting the situation. In order to restore order to their lives, some aspired to leadership, and having newly found freedom, they had no restraint on their sights for power, possibly in response to their former enslavement. The result is a chaotic power struggle fed by tyrants battling for control, each wanting to be the master and not one of the followers. Having been freed of their grueling plantation labor, the desire for agricultural work must have been extremely low. Thus, in arid West Africa, the supplies and crops ran out, and chaotic dictatorship has set in. Thus is the case with almost every African country which was once under the heavy hand of Western colonial rule.
What fear, what complex, makes you suggest people who differ only in skin pigment live geologically isolated, as if their combination is the catalyst for apocalypse? Isolation breeds an "us and them" attitude, a seperation made painfully obvious in the United States and in South Africa in recent decades. Together we learn about each other, and together we are stronger, but should we hide in our little fortresses staring at each other over the walls, we learn nothing of each other, and enact a standoff of eternal proportion. It's the incest of cultural tradition.
PS: I will copy this from another post, concerning American "Democracy":
"In the end the government is ruled by the people. All governments are."
In my opinion, wrong. All governments SHOULD be. Practically, none are. The "government" is an autonomous company, a corporation of sorts, that operates to its own interests (ie, that of political and economical benefit) and not the whims of its citizens. The "government" (this group of people who feel charged with "running" the country, or for their own power struggle), believes that occasionally ignoring of defying the will of the people is in the public's best interest. To this end, it misinforms and mismanages protocol to manipulate public interest towards government goals. The people staff the government, but the government carefully selects its staff from the people it manipulates through the media. (Or is it the media manipulating the government through the people... likely both symbiotically).
In short, the average citizen has extremely little control over their representation on a national and international scale.
Do I think the government should be allowed to deny some rights to protect others? No. The government should be audited by the public constantly, and denied the autonomous nature it has in this century assumed. Rebellion against the government may be treasonous, but if so, then the United States was founded by traitorous criminal masterminds. To voice one's opinion in contradiction is and should be protected under freedom of speech.
if you think american governmental system works come live over here so you can see for yourself how fucked up it is dumb-ass
