If Mort Divine ruled the world

HOW DARE HE POINT OUT THE NONACCEPTANCE OF THE GAYZ IN MUZZIE COUNTRIES WHEN IN THE UNITED STATES FAGS WHO PARADE AROUND IN THE STREETS AND LIVE A LIFE OF PRIVILEGE FACE THE SAME TYPE OF HORRIFIC HOMOPHOBIA! WE TOSSED 18 QUEERS OFF THE TOP FLOOR OF THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING JUST LAST WEEK! :lol:

stupid fuckin' wokies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: CiG
EXLa918UcAM92fO
 

First tweet is fair imo, a politician's personal life is secondary to their ability to perform the actions desired by the voter. Many people I'll never know are raped at gunpoint without anyone other than the victim and victim's family/friends caring, there's no reason to suddenly care about rape at gunpoint only once it presents a conflict of interest.
 
Seems redundant because until it's proven true they're just accusations anyway and accusations against politicians should always be treated with even more skepticism than usual. If it's proven that Biden raped someone, you wouldn't be able to vote for him anyway.

The hypocrisy is that the Democrats are the #BelieveWomen #MeToo party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TechnicalBarbarity
@TechnicalBarbarity

1588870845403.jpg

Another innocent starving womyn of color forced into desperation to reclaim her pride after it was so savagely violated by employees :(((((((((((((

Maybe Techy can make an appeal to his cousin Kim Kardashian and get Trump to secure a pardon?
 
WHAT THE FUCK SHE WAS STARVING HOW CAN YOU SAY MCD'S ISN'T ESSENTIAL I LIVE TWO BLOCKS FROM POOR PEOPLE I KNOW THEIR PLIGHT
 
.... mcdonalds has a drive through and customer pickup brah. :lol:

I LIVE TWO BLOCKS FROM POOR PEOPLE I KNOW THEIR PLIGHT
"WAT DO YOU MEANZ? NO ONE IN DIS COUNTRY IS STARVING AND FIGHTING TO LIVE". Lulz


And btw kim kardashians mother is a scottish/irish/english/german/whateverthefuckelse euromutt(like yourself) from san diego(your hometown). Probably one of your aunts or something. They're definitely more closely related to you than me. ;)
 
Great piece:

http://bostonreview.net/race/olufem...WA7TtspOZUYO-eq5l9B7WIyK3TF6Vi-O3Su1527yXAK9Q

Frazier argues that Washington’s approach was not only misguided, but based on faulty analysis of the economic potential of African American business. The total net worth of all 115 original attendees did not even amount to $1 million. By the time Frazier wrote his book in 1955, all eleven black-owned banks in the nation combined did not represent the amount of capital in the average local bank in smaller white cities. There was simply not enough black wealth for a separate black economy to “bootstrap” itself up. Even if the initiative successfully encouraged people to buy black—for example, with dollars earned at their jobs at the Ford plant—it would still not create a black economy. Nonetheless, shortly after the group’s fiftieth anniversary, the league doubled down on its goal to preach the gospel of faith in black business. No wonder Frazier concludes that an African American economy would remain a pipedream into the 1960s, as it had been at the turn of the century.

Why did the myth of a black economy as a comprehensive response to anti-black racism survive, even when prominent black businessmen could have known that it wasn’t a serious possibility? In Frazier’s telling, it was the particular class interests of the small but influential black bourgeoisie that carried the idea. Some were business owners, hoping to enjoy a monopoly of the African American economic market. Others were salaried professionals—far and away the largest percentage of the black middle class at the time—hoping to work their way into white-owned marketing firms on the strength of their presumed knowledge of untapped black purchasing power. Either way, the National Negro Business League promoted a viewpoint that encouraged people to confront the complex problem of white hegemony over politics, culture, and the economy with the mythical premise that black people could spend and invest their way out of domination.

Frazier saves his most scathing criticisms for the black press, “the chief medium of communication which creates and perpetuates the world of make-believe for the black bourgeoisie.” While acknowledging the contributions of black publications such as the Chicago Defender and Frederick Douglass’s Paper, he nevertheless insists that the black press’s “demand for equality for the Negro in American life is concerned primarily with opportunities which will benefit the black bourgeoisie economically and enhance the social status of the Negro.” The elite control of prominent black media advanced these subgroup interests seemingly without regard to the larger group. As an example, Frazier notes that the Norfolk, Virginia, black newspaper Journal and Guide celebrated the election of a black doctor to the presidency of a local affiliate of the American Medical Association—in spite of the fact that he had opposed “socialized medicine,” which no doubt would have benefitted working-class African Americans.

Frazier concludes that, whether in the black press or in business, “the black bourgeoisie have shown no interest in the ‘liberation’ of Negroes”—that is, unless “it affected their own status or acceptance by the white community.” At every opportunity, “the black bourgeoisie has exploited the Negro masses as ruthlessly as have whites.” Frazier surely overstates things here, but his book is a window into a common phenomenon.