I don't believe you have proper (official) woke credentials where you can assign wokeness. The woke won't like it.GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:But I thought conservatives hated cancel culture?packgrad said:PackBacker07 said:
A lot of conservative snowflakes on here scared of college (and pro) athletes finally finding their voice and power.
A lot of woke liberals think turning off the tv equals scared. Too bad y'all are more interested in burning down buildings than watching sports so ratings will continue to decline, like every other woke sport.
Now y'all wanna cancel college sports and cancel your WPC memberships.
What's the deal?
People pay to watch sports. That it. Pretty simple if you have an ounce of intelligence.
Oh I understand it. And what you said is EXACTLY how cancel culture works. See the wonderful Goya example that Ripper just gave.
Goya didn't put TTTRRRRUUUMMMMPPP on their cans. Not apples to apples at all. But please continue...
Oh, are we now making meaningless distinctions? Fun!
Here's one: you can't eat college football!
Boycotting something because it offends you is the essence or cancel culture. You're woke after all!
Wake to wear BLM on their helmets this season
33,538 Views |
316 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by cowboypack02
GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:But I thought conservatives hated cancel culture?packgrad said:PackBacker07 said:
A lot of conservative snowflakes on here scared of college (and pro) athletes finally finding their voice and power.
A lot of woke liberals think turning off the tv equals scared. Too bad y'all are more interested in burning down buildings than watching sports so ratings will continue to decline, like every other woke sport.
Now y'all wanna cancel college sports and cancel your WPC memberships.
What's the deal?
People pay to watch sports. That it. Pretty simple if you have an ounce of intelligence.
Oh I understand it. And what you said is EXACTLY how cancel culture works. See the wonderful Goya example that Ripper just gave.
Goya didn't put TTTRRRRUUUMMMMPPP on their cans. Not apples to apples at all. But please continue...
Oh, are we now making meaningless distinctions? Fun!
Here's one: you can't eat college football!
Boycotting something because it offends you is the essence or cancel culture. You're woke after all!
Cancel culture extends way beyond boycotting a bean supplier because you are triggered that he votes differently than you do.
I'm still watching football tonight, woke guy. Yet another failed argument for you.
packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:But I thought conservatives hated cancel culture?packgrad said:PackBacker07 said:
A lot of conservative snowflakes on here scared of college (and pro) athletes finally finding their voice and power.
A lot of woke liberals think turning off the tv equals scared. Too bad y'all are more interested in burning down buildings than watching sports so ratings will continue to decline, like every other woke sport.
Now y'all wanna cancel college sports and cancel your WPC memberships.
What's the deal?
People pay to watch sports. That it. Pretty simple if you have an ounce of intelligence.
Oh I understand it. And what you said is EXACTLY how cancel culture works. See the wonderful Goya example that Ripper just gave.
Goya didn't put TTTRRRRUUUMMMMPPP on their cans. Not apples to apples at all. But please continue...
Oh, are we now making meaningless distinctions? Fun!
Here's one: you can't eat college football!
Boycotting something because it offends you is the essence or cancel culture. You're woke after all!
Cancel culture extends way beyond boycotting a bean supplier because you are triggered that he votes differently than you do.
I'm still watching football tonight, woke guy. Yet another failed argument for you.
Me too. Even though I hate football and want to cancel it.
It's good to have it back.
The first amendment is a recognition that free speech is a god given right and was added to the constitution to protect it. For me, free speech ends when an individual uses a corporation platform for their own purpose. Now, if the corporation supports the individual by allowing them to use its platform for the individual, then, they have a compact. Good for them...PackBacker07 said:
A lot of conservative snowflakes on here scared of college (and pro) athletes finally finding their voice and power.
If a corporation says: We are a (insert industry) company and do not want our platform to be used for individual purposes, then, the individual freedom of speech ends. An individual who violates that company's policy, can be fired for cause. I support this as well.
The things that gets me is: non-profits are not supposed to be engaging in political speech in order to stay non-profit. This is the argument made by some regarding churches. A church could lose its non-profit status if they engage in political speech or at least that's the threat that's been made.
I believe in the following: your rights end where my rights begin and vice-versa. Think about how pleasant the world would be if everyone considered others rights. Perhaps the rioters wouldn't destroy other people's property...
packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:"You can indeed disagree with a position held by one or many black people without being racist."packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:packgrad said:GoPack2008 said:You uh, sure you're not racist?packgrad said:WolfQuacker said:I can't imagine thinking that even a single use of excessive force that results in death isn't a HUGE matter. This is coming from a huge supporter of the Police as my dad moonlighted as an officer when I was a kid to help support us while getting his business up and going.packgrad said:MrStateFanGuy said:
I cannot imagine being so upset that black people don't want murdered by cops that you say you'll stop watching sports. What is wrong with some of you?
I cannot imagine being so ignorant to believe police murdering black people is a big problem in this country.
I will also say that I think systemic racism in policing is a problem, as well as in other areas of society. I am NOT a supporter of the BLM organization, but highly support the underlying message and efforts related to establishing equality across the board for everyone. I also don't have a problem with Wake choosing to do this. If State does similar, I really hope it's not BLM, but will support it either way.
Oh, I think the murder of innocent black people is terrible. I don't think black lives are indiscriminately being taken by police though. The whole narrative is horse*****
Cuz buddy, this is pretty damn racist.
"I think black people upset over the killing of black people by police officers are full of ****" is a position you are perfectly entitled to, but it's definitely, definitely racist.
It's not racist at all. I mean if we're using definitions and all. I know the woke like to make up words and definitions though.
You said quite clearly you think the narrative is horse *****
Maybe that isn't racist, but it does look pretty damn racist, you gotta admit. But I could be wrong, so let's discuss:
Why do you think so many black people think it's not horse ***** Do you think they've been deceived? If so, by whom? Do you think they're pushing it disingenuously for some sort of ulterior motive? If so, why? Is it something else entirely that I haven't asked?
Yes. I can disagree with a black narrative and it not be racist. I know that's traumatizing for you to hear, but it's true.
To the rest of your questions, yes.
You can indeed disagree with a position held by one or many black people without being racist.
I would suggest that thinking an entire group of people is lying, simply because of the color of their skin, is indeed the definition of racism.
To angrily and reflexively dismiss something as a "black narrative" as if it's representative of a monolithic "blackness," without actually being curious to understand where they are coming from is also pretty unequivocally racist.
It's not about whether you agree or disagree. It's about the assumptions that got you to that point, and the positions you take.
It's adorable how you try to justify disagreement equals racism. So woke. So stupid. Lol.
Is disagreeing with an entire group of people who disagree with BLM racist? Using your logic it has to be.
I said the exact opposite of what you think I said. Try actually reading what's been written.
No, you're trying so hard to make a comment racist.
"To angrily and reflexively dismiss something as a "black narrative" as if it's representative of a monolithic "blackness," without actually being curious to understand where they are coming from is also pretty unequivocally racist"
How many times are you going to cry wolf about racism?
BLM isn't just black people that are propagating a false narrative about black people. I'd argue it's more woke white people. To assert that someone isn't "curious" about where they are coming from after watching hours of riots and protests is just sheer ignorance. Why do you feel there is not enough info out there to see where they're coming from? They're a terrorist organization. They don't denounce the rioting, the looting, the killing. A black life to these terrorists only holds value if it was taken by a white police officer. It is staggering how stupid that position is to people that supposedly are trying to improve race relations.
But they're monolithically black in your eyes, so they need to be handled with kids gloves, because the truth shows their narrative is hogwash.
Very well said.
Bas2020 said:
Has there been even a shred of evidence that any of the police arrests /shootings have been racially motivated? Are these cops secret klan members ? Do they have racist social media ? What is the evidence ?
Police stop black drivers 2x as often as whites and search them 4x as often as whites. They arrest 4x as many blacks as whites for weed possession even though whites and blacks use at the same rate.
It's clear that racial bias is driving cop behavior but would you be able to find explicit evidence of racism in these stops or arrests?
Implicit bias doesn't look like a klan hood or swastika tattoo on the cop's forehead. It's more subtle but that doesn't mean it's not real.
All that being said, it's obvious that all black killings by white cops are not racially motivated, either implicitly or explicitly. Some are justified, and some are just bad police work.
MrStateFanGuy said:Oh wow, cry me a friggin' river about that "guilt trip". Your life has not been made any harder in any significant way because you're white. That's not to say that your life isn't hard. But it hasn't been more difficult because you are white.GuerrillaPack said:
You want to talk about racism? It's racist that all white people are being put on a guilt trip over the statistically rare cases of police unjustifiabably killing a black person.
A guilt trip? GTFO. As a white person, any short-term "guilt trip" you're talking about pales in comparison to the stuff that our Black/Latino/Asian/Middle Eastern/etc. friends have gone through in this country for decades.
What a load of garbage. What have Latino, Asian, and Middle Eastern people "gone through"? This is just more of the same Leftist "white guilt" crap, insinuating that white people are "oppressing" every other ethnic group.
The fact of the matter is that white people are NOT oppressing other ethnic groups.
And white Americans are the ones actually facing systematic and institutionalized racism and discrimination -- i.e., affirmative action.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
GuerrillaPack said:MrStateFanGuy said:Oh wow, cry me a friggin' river about that "guilt trip". Your life has not been made any harder in any significant way because you're white. That's not to say that your life isn't hard. But it hasn't been more difficult because you are white.GuerrillaPack said:
You want to talk about racism? It's racist that all white people are being put on a guilt trip over the statistically rare cases of police unjustifiabably killing a black person.
A guilt trip? GTFO. As a white person, any short-term "guilt trip" you're talking about pales in comparison to the stuff that our Black/Latino/Asian/Middle Eastern/etc. friends have gone through in this country for decades.
What a load of garbage. What have Latino, Asian, and Middle Eastern people "gone through"? This is just more of the same Leftist "white guilt" crap, insinuating that white people are "oppressing" every other ethnic group.
The fact of the matter is that white people are NOT oppressing other ethnic groups.
And white Americans are the ones actually facing systematic and institutionalized racism and discrimination -- i.e., affirmative action.
Wow. Yikes. Oof. You serious Clark?
I feel like you have to bring this up in every argument regarding race. I also feel like i have to remind you to look at the actual crime statistics.Civilized said:Bas2020 said:
Has there been even a shred of evidence that any of the police arrests /shootings have been racially motivated? Are these cops secret klan members ? Do they have racist social media ? What is the evidence ?
Police stop black drivers 2x as often as whites and search them 4x as often as whites. They arrest 4x as many blacks as whites for weed possession even though whites and blacks use at the same rate.
It's clear that racial bias is driving cop behavior but would you be able to find explicit evidence of racism in these stops or arrests?
Implicit bias doesn't look like a klan hood or swastika tattoo on the cop's forehead. It's more subtle but that doesn't mean it's not real.
All that being said, it's obvious that all black killings by white cops are not racially motivated, either implicitly or explicitly. Some are justified, and some are just bad police work.
Kinda getting old.....
cowboypack02 said:I feel like you have to bring this up in every argument regarding race. I also feel like i have to remind you to look at the actual crime statistics.Civilized said:Bas2020 said:
Has there been even a shred of evidence that any of the police arrests /shootings have been racially motivated? Are these cops secret klan members ? Do they have racist social media ? What is the evidence ?
Police stop black drivers 2x as often as whites and search them 4x as often as whites. They arrest 4x as many blacks as whites for weed possession even though whites and blacks use at the same rate.
It's clear that racial bias is driving cop behavior but would you be able to find explicit evidence of racism in these stops or arrests?
Implicit bias doesn't look like a klan hood or swastika tattoo on the cop's forehead. It's more subtle but that doesn't mean it's not real.
All that being said, it's obvious that all black killings by white cops are not racially motivated, either implicitly or explicitly. Some are justified, and some are just bad police work.
Kinda getting old.....
And I'll keep saying it as long as people keep saying head-in-the-sand **** like "Are these cops secret klan members/What is the evidence of racial motiviation in treatment of blacks by cops."
In the macro the criminal justice system treats black people much differently (worse) than whites. There's no reason for black drivers to get pulled over and searched 2x as much and 4x as much as whites, but they do, and it's because they're black and cops police them differently. The same is true of charging rates, conviction rates, sentencing, parole hearings, etc. At every turn, GIVEN SIMILAR CRIMES AND EVIDENCE, blacks' outcomes are worse.
Lots of Brickyardigans need to see a Klan hood or a facebook page with racist speech and symbology to believe that racial motivations exist for the cops, prosecutors, judges, juries, and parole boards that effect these outcomes.
That's not the way implicit bias works. Almost none of those cops, DA's, jury and parole board members are explicitly racist but still over and over again they make decisions that disproportionately negatively impact black Americans.
The heart of all this is that for generations "racist" and "racism" was used almost exclusively to describe explicit racists that were openly proud to treat black people poorly.
This devolves into a name-calling exercise and people shut down because they feel insulted. Just because you fall victim to implicit biases (we all do) doesn't mean the situation can't improve, or that anyone is calling you a white devil.
Yeah, I'm 100% serious. And I guess your response means that you have no substantial rebuttal to my argument. You can't provide any way in which white people are supposedly "oppressing" Latinos, Asians, and Middle Eastern people in America today, or the last several decades, as you said. Because there is none.MrStateFanGuy said:GuerrillaPack said:MrStateFanGuy said:Oh wow, cry me a friggin' river about that "guilt trip". Your life has not been made any harder in any significant way because you're white. That's not to say that your life isn't hard. But it hasn't been more difficult because you are white.GuerrillaPack said:
You want to talk about racism? It's racist that all white people are being put on a guilt trip over the statistically rare cases of police unjustifiabably killing a black person.
A guilt trip? GTFO. As a white person, any short-term "guilt trip" you're talking about pales in comparison to the stuff that our Black/Latino/Asian/Middle Eastern/etc. friends have gone through in this country for decades.
What a load of garbage. What have Latino, Asian, and Middle Eastern people "gone through"? This is just more of the same Leftist "white guilt" crap, insinuating that white people are "oppressing" every other ethnic group.
The fact of the matter is that white people are NOT oppressing other ethnic groups.
And white Americans are the ones actually facing systematic and institutionalized racism and discrimination -- i.e., affirmative action.
Wow. Yikes. Oof. You serious Clark?
To the contrary, it is white/European people who face organized, systemic, and institutionalized discrimination and racism in America today. White people are discriminated against, by law, via affirmative action. In addition, there is a highly organized leftist/Marxist psychological operation (via academia, etc) to attack and vilify whites/Europeans as a race -- ie, accusing them of being responsible for virtually all evils in the world, and claiming that their advantages are due to "white privilege", etc. Almost every white person who has been on a college campus for the past several decades can attest to this -- ie, that whites/Europeans are attacked and vilified in this way, via the college curriculum and other official programs/initiatives at the colleges.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Glass and Henderson censoring free speech because it goes against their narrative!WarrenPeace said:GuerrillaPack said:
Why are my posts getting deleted?
I'll say it again...
I'm so sick and tired of all of this.
Why is it that what is, as a matter of fact, a domestic terrorist organization, is being promoted like this?
I was wondering the same thing. All I did was tell a poster he was misinformed and my post was deleted.
I get what GP is saying....the average white person isn't racist, and is doing nothing to oppress anyone. That goes for most people.
But I don't agree that there's nothing oppressing blacks. (or poor in general, really)
The Great Society did exactly that. It destroyed the black family. It made them dependent on the government (on Democrats, really) and stopped any real progress they could have made after the civil rights era in the 60's.
They aren't devoid of any responsibility, either, but in the big picture the welfare system does cause oppression.
However, to say that today's whites cause any oppression or anything like that, I would agree that is total BS.
Nobody is oppressing blacks today, certainly not actively. The issues they have with the police are symptoms, not the root of the problem. If you could wave your magic wand and suddenly they both loved each other, the rest of their issues would still exist and nothing would be changed.
But I don't agree that there's nothing oppressing blacks. (or poor in general, really)
The Great Society did exactly that. It destroyed the black family. It made them dependent on the government (on Democrats, really) and stopped any real progress they could have made after the civil rights era in the 60's.
They aren't devoid of any responsibility, either, but in the big picture the welfare system does cause oppression.
However, to say that today's whites cause any oppression or anything like that, I would agree that is total BS.
Nobody is oppressing blacks today, certainly not actively. The issues they have with the police are symptoms, not the root of the problem. If you could wave your magic wand and suddenly they both loved each other, the rest of their issues would still exist and nothing would be changed.
Civ is really hanging his hat on this ONE study of IIRC ONE state as if it's the case everywhere. There have been other studies that don't show these things as he describes them.cowboypack02 said:I feel like you have to bring this up in every argument regarding race. I also feel like i have to remind you to look at the actual crime statistics.Civilized said:Bas2020 said:
Has there been even a shred of evidence that any of the police arrests /shootings have been racially motivated? Are these cops secret klan members ? Do they have racist social media ? What is the evidence ?
Police stop black drivers 2x as often as whites and search them 4x as often as whites. They arrest 4x as many blacks as whites for weed possession even though whites and blacks use at the same rate.
It's clear that racial bias is driving cop behavior but would you be able to find explicit evidence of racism in these stops or arrests?
Implicit bias doesn't look like a klan hood or swastika tattoo on the cop's forehead. It's more subtle but that doesn't mean it's not real.
All that being said, it's obvious that all black killings by white cops are not racially motivated, either implicitly or explicitly. Some are justified, and some are just bad police work.
Kinda getting old.....
We can talk about traffic stops all day, but they aren't the crux of the issue....the issue supposedly is, that cops are more likely to shoot blacks during an encounter.
And this is not true. White cops aren't any more likely to shoot a black person than anyone else.
26% of civilians killed by police in 2015 were black. Now we know that blacks are only 12% of the population, right?
But then adjust that thought with how much crime blacks commit, relative to that population percentage, and you'll find that cops don't shoot them any more than anyone else. They simply encounter more blacks in the process of doing their jobs because that is who is committing most of the crime.
"For example, 26% of civilians killed by police shootings in 2015 were Black, even though Black civilians comprise only 12% of the US population. According to this 12% benchmark, more Black civilians are fatally shot than we would expect, indicating disparity. News organizations and researchers using this method find robust evidence of anti-Black disparity in fatal shootings.
However, using population as a benchmark makes the strong assumption that White and Black civilians have equal exposure to situations that result in FOIS. If there are racial differences in exposure to these situations, calculations of racial disparity based on population benchmarks will be misleading . Researchers have attempted to avoid this issue by using race-specific violent crime as a benchmark, as the majority of FOIS involve armed civilians When violent crime is used as a benchmark, anti-Black disparities in FOIS disappear or even reverse"
EXACTLY what I've been saying. When you get in front the police more often than anyone else, your chances of running across one having a bad day go way up. And when you're committing more crimes than anyone else, the police's chances of running across a violent person of that color also go way up. And that's why the numbers are what they are.
All the "traffic stop" crap is just symptomatic. Do away with the war on drugs and you'll eliminate a bunch of that.
Why don't we ever talk about Asian privilege?
What has enabled them to thrive more than white's and blacks in this country?
What has enabled them to thrive more than white's and blacks in this country?
Work ethic.Bas2020 said:
Why don't we ever talk about Asian privilege?
What has enabled them to thrive more than white's and blacks in this country?
Plus, it's not every "Tom, Dick and Harry" Asian that emigrates here, either. It's the more industrious or "go getter" types. So their success % tends to be a bit better.
Sort of the same reason they score higher on standardized tests...they don't test everyone, only the smart ones. Particularly places like China.
Not saying Asians "cheat" here like that, but they are mostly the "smarter" ones that end up here and therefore do well in higher numbers.
I think what Guerrilla is saying: Name one thing that is systematic regarding racism today.
Now, if one person wants to discriminate; would you consider that there freedom of speech, expression, or whatever? I think what most liberal minded people don't want to accept is the one person can be racist, that's there right, correct? That doesn't mean anyone has to like it; however, shouldn't they have that right in a free society?
When all people have to conform to one persons ideals, that doesn't sound like a free society to me. People are people, let them do the things they want. One persons rights should not interfere with another persons right.
Should a person have the right to operate a private business?
Should a person have the right to associate with the people they want in that business?
Does a person have the right to interfere with the right of a person operating a private business?
Should the person interfere with the right of the person operating a private business?
None of the questions asked above says that I support any type of discrimination within the persons right to operate the private business the way they see fit. That would be a business decision the owner would make. What I am saying is: just let the person run the business and let it succeed or fail on its own merit. No protesting needed...
If another person wants to create a business plan and offer an alternative, good for them. They have that right as well. We need to quit the bickering and let the free market work the best it can. The free market will pick the winners and loser!!!! And if it doesn't, move on... We have better things to be joyful about in our lives. If you feel the calling to support a person less fortunate, go for it. I would say that's admirable!!!
Everybody has a world view! Accept it and move on. Through your actions, not words, and especially not laws, may you affect the world view of another...
Now, if one person wants to discriminate; would you consider that there freedom of speech, expression, or whatever? I think what most liberal minded people don't want to accept is the one person can be racist, that's there right, correct? That doesn't mean anyone has to like it; however, shouldn't they have that right in a free society?
When all people have to conform to one persons ideals, that doesn't sound like a free society to me. People are people, let them do the things they want. One persons rights should not interfere with another persons right.
Should a person have the right to operate a private business?
Should a person have the right to associate with the people they want in that business?
Does a person have the right to interfere with the right of a person operating a private business?
Should the person interfere with the right of the person operating a private business?
None of the questions asked above says that I support any type of discrimination within the persons right to operate the private business the way they see fit. That would be a business decision the owner would make. What I am saying is: just let the person run the business and let it succeed or fail on its own merit. No protesting needed...
If another person wants to create a business plan and offer an alternative, good for them. They have that right as well. We need to quit the bickering and let the free market work the best it can. The free market will pick the winners and loser!!!! And if it doesn't, move on... We have better things to be joyful about in our lives. If you feel the calling to support a person less fortunate, go for it. I would say that's admirable!!!
Everybody has a world view! Accept it and move on. Through your actions, not words, and especially not laws, may you affect the world view of another...
The welfare system. So you can follow that right to.....The Democratic Party. They are the biggest racists there are, while being the first ones to call others the same.caryking said:
I think what Guerrilla is saying: Name one thing that is systematic regarding racism today.
.
Their platform is always "Oh, the blacks are so oppressed and can't possibly do anything for themselves without our divine and magnanimous assistance".
That's their answer to most everything, really, but especially race related issues.
And look what their actions have done to the black family over the last 50 years.
I think the data is pretty clear on that.
I was talking more specifically about racism against minorities. None the less, I understand what you are saying...Pacfanweb said:The welfare system. So you can follow that right to.....The Democratic Party. They are the biggest racists there are, while being the first ones to call others the same.caryking said:
I think what Guerrilla is saying: Name one thing that is systematic regarding racism today.
.
Their platform is always "Oh, the blacks are so oppressed and can't possibly do anything for themselves without our divine and magnanimous assistance".
That's their answer to most everything, really, but especially race related issues.
And look what their actions have done to the black family over the last 50 years.
I think the data is pretty clear on that.
Okay, if you mean that 'whites in general towards minorities'.....then I agree. That's not a thing anymore.caryking said:I was talking more specifically about racism against minorities. None the less, I understand what you are saying...Pacfanweb said:The welfare system. So you can follow that right to.....The Democratic Party. They are the biggest racists there are, while being the first ones to call others the same.caryking said:
I think what Guerrilla is saying: Name one thing that is systematic regarding racism today.
.
Their platform is always "Oh, the blacks are so oppressed and can't possibly do anything for themselves without our divine and magnanimous assistance".
That's their answer to most everything, really, but especially race related issues.
And look what their actions have done to the black family over the last 50 years.
I think the data is pretty clear on that.
There is little to no effect on minorities today from the general white population being racist towards them.
But when we say "systemic" racism....I'm automatically going to point out the welfare system. That is a huge part of the current issues blacks have today, and IMO it was designed that way. But whether it was or not is another conversation, I suppose. Designed that way or not, the effect has been the same.
Or jewish privilege. For example, look at how disproportionately high jews are respresented at Ivy League schools versus their percentage of the population. Jews are only 2% of the US population, but for decades have been around 20% of the student population at schools like Harvard, Yale, the University of Pennsylvania. That's just one example of disproportionately high representation of jews in positions of power in our society. Look also at Wall Street, banking, Hollywood, and the Establishment media.Bas2020 said:
Why don't we ever talk about Asian privilege?
What has enabled them to thrive more than white's and blacks in this country?
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
PackBacker07 said:
Obviously not a fan of BLM, but honestly that doesn't really bother me. Can't even see it when they're playing I would imagine. Could it open Pandora's box? Yes. But it hasn't yet imo if they all look like this.
Edit... just noticed the black fist on the side. I take it back. Not a fan.
The raised or clenched fist is also a popular symbol of Marxism/Communism. And, as has been now exposed, one of the founders of Black Lives Matter has admitted that BLM, as an organization, is ideologically rooted in Marxism and explicitly stated "we are trained Marxists".
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
Deep State Trump confirmed
Such an incredibly weak attempt to obfuscate and attempt to deny the truth.statefan91 said:
Deep State Trump confirmed
Sure, many people who are not Marxists also raise their fists at rallies/etc, and are not doing so with any intent to signal allegiance with Marxism/communism.
But are you seriously trying to deny that the clenched or raised fist is a symbol of Communism? It's a 100% established and obvious fact. It's now also 100% established fact that BLM is an (admittedly) Marxist organization. And do you think it's some "coincidence" that BLM adopts the clenched fist of Marxism as it's symbol?
But, you are correct on one thing...Donald Trump is, in fact, part of the "Deep State", and is actually a minion of the elites, and is working to advance the globalist/NWO agenda.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
I think we have enough evidence to support what you are saying. Start by spending time in a Section 8 housing. I went to Cary High School and it was a school where Raleigh housing bused there kids. I became friendly with a number of people that lived in the Section 8 housing. In fact, I used to go and place basketball there. Funny enough, I was well recognized by people that lived there. It's all in how you treat people; not, the rhetoric spewed by so many today.Pacfanweb said:Okay, if you mean that 'whites in general towards minorities'.....then I agree. That's not a thing anymore.caryking said:I was talking more specifically about racism against minorities. None the less, I understand what you are saying...Pacfanweb said:The welfare system. So you can follow that right to.....The Democratic Party. They are the biggest racists there are, while being the first ones to call others the same.caryking said:
I think what Guerrilla is saying: Name one thing that is systematic regarding racism today.
.
Their platform is always "Oh, the blacks are so oppressed and can't possibly do anything for themselves without our divine and magnanimous assistance".
That's their answer to most everything, really, but especially race related issues.
And look what their actions have done to the black family over the last 50 years.
I think the data is pretty clear on that.
There is little to no effect on minorities today from the general white population being racist towards them.
But when we say "systemic" racism....I'm automatically going to point out the welfare system. That is a huge part of the current issues blacks have today, and IMO it was designed that way. But whether it was or not is another conversation, I suppose. Designed that way or not, the effect has been the same.
I wouldn't wish for anyone to live in Section 8 housing... This was a horrible idea by Government!
This. This is why BLM means so many different things. This is not why it is on the jerseys but this is why I don't like it.DrummerboyWolf said:Read their charter. They want to destroy the nuclear family along with other things. Also look up Patrice Colours(I think that is how you spell it) on video saying her and the other founders are "trained Marxist." It's out there if you want to find it. Look up Marcellus Wiley, former NFL player and now a commentator and find his remarks on BLM. Another really easy to find if you want to look.Pacfanweb said:https://blacklivesmatter.com/Ground_Chuck said:There is no BLM organization in any meaningful way.King Leary said:
Are they supporting BLM the phrase or BLM the organization? Big difference
https://blacklivesmatter.com/chapters/
They are significant and meaningful.
Agreed. The actual message that Black lives do matter is being lost and has been hijacked by the organization that is Black Life Matters.org Many people who say they support Black Life Matters don't realize the organization is a Marxist organization that wants to overthrow the Constitution, destroy the nuclear family and capitalism, religion, and pretty much hate all men. Ignorance is no excuse. It's sad that ignorance pervades much of society. I think all lives matter, but the organization that is BLM does not.Wlfpackamk said:This. This is why BLM means so many different things. This is not why it is on the jerseys but this is why I don't like it.DrummerboyWolf said:Read their charter. They want to destroy the nuclear family along with other things. Also look up Patrice Colours(I think that is how you spell it) on video saying her and the other founders are "trained Marxist." It's out there if you want to find it. Look up Marcellus Wiley, former NFL player and now a commentator and find his remarks on BLM. Another really easy to find if you want to look.Pacfanweb said:https://blacklivesmatter.com/Ground_Chuck said:There is no BLM organization in any meaningful way.King Leary said:
Are they supporting BLM the phrase or BLM the organization? Big difference
https://blacklivesmatter.com/chapters/
They are significant and meaningful.
Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
This thread is about 10 posts away from a full on QAnon.
I tried but y'all have already made up your minds that you know everything so have fun with the Marxist leftist deep state circle jerk.
I tried but y'all have already made up your minds that you know everything so have fun with the Marxist leftist deep state circle jerk.
Here is the BLM co-founder, Patrisse Cullors, on video in an interview from 2015 admitting that BLM is ideologically rooted in Marxism, and stating "we are trained Marxists".
See at 5:50 - 7:30 in this video.
The interviewer asks her what the ideological foundation of BLM is, with concerns that there is a "lack of ideological direction" in BLM. She responds by saying "We are trained Marxists" (at 7:00-7:10 in video).
See at 5:50 - 7:30 in this video.
The interviewer asks her what the ideological foundation of BLM is, with concerns that there is a "lack of ideological direction" in BLM. She responds by saying "We are trained Marxists" (at 7:00-7:10 in video).
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
BLM is an admitted Marxist organization -- as admitted by the co-founder.GoPack2008 said:
This thread is about 10 posts away from a full on QAnon.
I tried but y'all have already made up your minds that you know everything so have fun with the Marxist leftist deep state circle jerk.
Deal with it. Or don't...and just run away and hide because you can't deal with the truth, or deny the obvious truth.
It is 100% relevant to discuss Marxism when discussing the BLM organization. That is their ideological foundation.
"Ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." - John 15:19
There you go again with those "pesky little facts." How dare you? Gopack2008 will again be crying "what organization!"GuerrillaPack said:
Here is the BLM co-founder, Patrisse Cullors, on video in an interview from 2015 admitting that BLM is ideologically rooted in Marxism, and stating "we are trained Marxists".
See at 5:50 - 7:30 in this video.
The interviewer asks her what the ideological foundation of BLM is, with concerns that there is a "lack of ideological direction" in BLM. She responds by saying "We are trained Marxists" (at 7:00-7:10 in video).
Being an N. C. State fan builds great character!
GuerrillaPack said:BLM is an admitted Marxist organization -- as admitted by the co-founder.GoPack2008 said:
This thread is about 10 posts away from a full on QAnon.
I tried but y'all have already made up your minds that you know everything so have fun with the Marxist leftist deep state circle jerk.
Deal with it. Or don't...and just run away and hide because you can't deal with the truth, or deny the obvious truth.
It is 100% relevant to discuss Marxism when discussing the BLM organization. That is their ideological foundation.
It really exposes the hypocrisy of media and leftists. If conservative groups have members that publicly espouse racist, sexist, and anti government ideologies, the entire group is branded of sharing beliefs.
The founders of BLM proudly shout out racist, sexist, and anti government ideologies, and the media and their sheeplike leftists say they don't count. Just ignore them. Only these "peaceful protesters" burning down buildings and terrorizing old people trying to eat dinner count. They're just fine.
Pacfanweb said:
The Great Society did exactly that. It destroyed the black family. It made them dependent on the government (on Democrats, really) and stopped any real progress they could have made after the civil rights era in the 60's.
Would we agree that there is less social stigma in black communities regarding receipt of public assistance?
Was that stigma always present or did it roll on gradually as an increasing proportion of black families received assistance?
Would we agree that rates of single motherhood, poverty, low earnings capability and job skills, high rates of unemployment, lower levels of education are underlying risk factors associated with public assistance?
So the question becomes, did an increasing proportion of black Americans receive assistance beginning in the 70's because they were actually the classic welfare queen caricature or because there were other externalities driving risk factors?
The two main drivers of black American marriage decline are unemployment and incarceration.
In the 1960's, major industries began withdrawing from from the inner cities due to skill-based technological change and globalization, leaving many lower-skilled but employable men without jobs. Between 1980 and 2000, the US lost two million manufacturing jobs and the decline exponentially from 2000 to 2010, although it's started making a small rebound since 2010.
These job losses disproportionately affect those with lower levels of education in cities.
And then we've got incarceration.
What the **** happened in 1970? Why did we start incarcerating American men exponentially more? Did we all of a sudden have exponentially more criminals, after 50 years of extremely steady incarceration rates?
Who does this gross increase in incarceration impact?
Featured Stories
See All
Ohio State Transfer Ja'Had Carter: "It's All Or Nothing"
by James Henderson
RELEASE: Four Pack Baseball Players Earn All-ACC Honors
by NC State Athletics
IPS LIVE: Wake Forest Recap And ACC Baseball Tourney Preview
by James Henderson
IPS IN 5: Trey Parker Has Arrived In Raleigh
by James Henderson