Thursday, October 8, 2009

RIP Black America Parts 1 & 2

Just a little something to think about. If you don't see yourself in any of this then there is no reason to be angry, right?

Part 1


PART 2



There is a part 3 -- but I don't like it. Too much talk about queens & goddesses, which in my humble opinion is just foolish talk.

It's been said that if you are not part of the solution then you are part of the problem. Well, in this case I'm not sure that's true. We can't make choices for other people and choices make all the difference.

43 comments:

BLACK INK said...

WOW!!!

Zabeth said...

WOW is right. Certainly does make you think.

Anonymous said...

Uncle Tom Lloyd Marcus becomes the face of the Tea Party movement


All across America, we’ve seen literally thousands of Tea Parties, Obamacare town hall protests, and the recent march on Washington. Hundreds of thousand of people, if not millions, have come out to voice their anger at what’s going on in their country courtesy of President Rahm Emanuel and his puppet, Barack Obama. And 99% of them have been white. That’s a fact. In fact, it’s probably higher than that, like 99.99%. It’s a white movement, plain and simple. But white people have been taught to hate themselves, and so they go out of their way to recruit Uncle Tom’s for their movements, hoping the media won’t call them racists. The family values crowd enlisted “Bishop” Harry Jackson in their fight against gay marriage. And Harry Jackson promptly repaid the favor by inviting “black conservative” crackhead criminal Marion Barry to speak at a rally for traditional marriage. And who can forget Julius Caesar (JC) Watts, the darling of the conservative movement in the 1990s, simply because he was the only black Republican in Congress? After being coddled and promoted by white Republicans for years, in 2008 Watts paid them back by saying he was probably going to vote for Obama, and hinted that he thinks the GOP is “racist.” And don’t get me started on Harry Alford.

Republicans have been doing this for decades, groveling and pandering to blacks in the hope that blacks will see just “color-blind” they are, and start voting GOP. And year after year, election after election, blacks continue voting for the Democrats by a factor of at least 9-1. In 2008, it was 19-1. 95% of blacks voted for Obama. And have conservatives learned anything? Nope. Look at the tea parties for proof. Until a couple days ago, hardly anyone could name a person associated with the tea parties. They came out of a true grass roots movement, and except for the few politicians and washed up C-list celebs who latched on to them, like Chuck Norris, there wasn’t a face attached to the movement. It was truly a mass movement, that didn’t revolve around a personality.

But in the past couple days, one person has become the face of the tea parties. And surprise, surprise, it’s a black guy. Hundreds of thousands, possibly millions of people show up at tea parties, and about 7 of them are black, and now one of them has become the public face of this white movement. I wrote about Marcus a long time ago. He wrote some lame song that’s now the Tea Party Anthem, and so he was invited up on stage to play and sing for the crowd at the Orlando protest. I said that his presence was proof that the tea parties aren’t serious, and that they were going nowhere. And after his Orlando performance, he was asked to perform at a whole bunch of other “conservative” political events and protests, by stupid white people who are eager to show they’re not racist.

Never mind that’s he’s “married” to a white woman. Oh hell no, that’s no problem. Conservatives will gladly embrace their own genocide if they think the media will stop calling them racists.

But in the past few days, Lloyd Marcus has become the national symbol of the Tea Party movement. He wrote a column for the neo-con website American Thinker denouncing liberals and Democrats for, you guessed it, “racism”. (Do blacks, “conservative” or “liberal”, ever talk about anything else?) Then influential columnist (and substitute host for Rush Limbaugh) started praising him on the National Review website. More prominent “conservative” writers picked up the theme and ran with it. Here’s one. There are lots more.

Unbelievably, even Peter Brimelow is now praising Lloyd Marcus.

Conservative Black Woman said...

Anonymous~I hope you feel better after your rant. But what in the heck does anything you've said have to do with this post? Talk about random!!!

Good grief! Anyway we get it--you vehemently dislike black conservatives. However, you have mistakenly classified Marion Barry as a conservative...uh huh...he belongs in your camp.

Anytime you feel the need to purge, and tell me how much you hate me and those who hold my world view feel free. Anything I can do to help....lol

ziggy said...

Hundreds of thousand of people, if not millions, have come out to voice their anger at what’s going on in their country courtesy of President Rahm Emanuel and his puppet, Barack Obama.

Anonymous of all that you've just spewed, the only thing that caught my attention was the fact that you are excusing Barack Obama from the results of his destructive leadership. Can't bring yourself to blame a black man? It's such an odd thing that so many black people are doing. We have seen eight years of Bush being blamed for all sorts of things,(some deserving. There have been 43 other white presidents before him, but I can say that I've not ever heard anyone accuse them of not being in control. Why does Obama become a puppet? I say this, because I've heard this so many times since he's taken office.
In Febuary of this year, I heard some "prophet" saying that things were going to get really bad in America, but Obama would only be a puppet, i.e. not really in control. Why the need to distance him from his decisions? Sometimes it seems that "black" and "responsibility" go together like oil and water. Hate to say it, but dang! Can a brother take the blame for his own actions?

politics said...

Ok CBW - I'm wondering what you really think about these videos. I watched Part I and unfortunately, due to disgust, could not bring myself to watch Part II. I'm not really sure what to say... I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure you'd be hard pressed to find any other ethnic group that blame their women for all of their groups' problems. IDK. Can women stop men from being men (with all of the rights, privileges and duties that entails)? Have white women stopped white men from being men - even after women's lib? Personally, I came from a two parent (married) home and I know for a fact that there is nothing that my mother could do that would/could prevent my father from being primary provider/protector of our family. Absolutely nothing... b/c he is a man! Yes, they argue and yes, my mother can be stubborn and argumentative but absolutely nothing would prevent my father from taking care of his responsibility to us and to her. So, yeah, I'm of the opinion that anything less than this from a man is unacceptable...but I could be wrong.

Zabeth said...

Why are we talking about Obama here?

Anyhoo, I appreciate diversity of opinions as it helps me to better evaluate my own opinions and perceptions. However, I too have a problem with the blame black women for everything argument.

I don't think the problems within the black community are solely the fault of BW (and Oprah)- that allows one party to skirt ALL responsibility...you know who I'm talking about.

I know plenty of WW who are baby mamas to black/biracial children and are in relationships with BM who string them along and won't make a real committments to them either. Further just as women sometimes make bad choices in men, men sometimes make bad choices in women. There are also many BW (self included) who don't fall into the stereotypical category the videographer presented.

I am also curious to hear what you REALLY think about this CBW :-)

lormarie said...

I see these videos as nothing more than rants by a frustrated man who is weak and powerless. The truth is, black men are completely responsible for their failures and black women are responsible for theirs.

Anonymous said...

So once again, a white movement has been completely neutralized by political correctness. Millions of white people are looking for a group that will speak out for them, and speak up for their interests, without apology. Then they find out that the tea party crowd not only won’t speak up for them, but their public mascot is a black man who’s engaged in white genocide.

Yeah, that’s a real smart plan for winning the hearts and minds of the millions of fed up white people in this country.

And conservatives wonder why they never make any progress, or win any big battles?

It’s fine for white women to marry black men, but two men getting married is a big deal?

Interracial marriage is hunky dory, but high taxes are an abomination?

Immigration is bad because we’re replacing the founding stock of this country, but it’s just dandy for the founding stock of this country to breed themselves out of existence by “marrying” blacks?

This is insane.

vintagemother said...

Hi CBW! ITA with Black Ink and Zabeth's sentiments of WOW! I thought the videos were full of food for thought. Especially because this week I had to take my DD's bio-dad to court for child support. On that date found myself saying negative things about black men. But God convicted me that I shouldn't say things like that, because I have a great DH, & because of the message it sends to my DS's, DH and DD. These videos helped to remind me of my role in being a good Christian and a good wife and good mother. -Meredith

Conservative Black Woman said...

Politics & Zabeth~I think that sadly there are elements of truth in this Vlogger's statements.

I don't know a single black woman who despises her child. However, I have observed some who could do a better job expressing love to their children.

I don't think black women are the sole cause of all the ills that plague our community. I believe that not just black folks but the problems in our society as a whole stems from our acceptance of moral relativism.

Anything goes except standing on the word of God. We no longer have any moral code or standard. Anything goes...marriage has been redefined; "god" is whoever or whatever you "feel" he is. Truth doesn't matter, because it's one is free to craft their "own truth".

We are a sick and demented people (I'm not just talking about black people). But it is black children who are suffering most from our collective pathology. These babies are hurting and that's why they are killing each other in the streets.

Black America needs to wake up, and make better choice if not for themselves for the love of their children.

Conservative Black Woman said...

Meredith!!!!!Where have you been Dear Heart???

You write:"These videos helped to remind me of my role in being a good Christian and a good wife and good mother."

That's exactly what I took away from them.

JMK said...

"Millions of white people are looking for a group that will speak out for them, and speak up for their interests, without apology. Then they find out that the tea party crowd not only won’t speak up for them, but their public mascot is a black man who’s engaged in white genocide." (anonymous)
<
<
The Tea Party movement is an economic movement NOT a racial identity movement.

Millions of blacks, Hispanics, Asians and others are angry about the flawed Keynesian economic policies that have been in full effect since January 2007 (they began in earnest around 2003), that have since gone into hyper-drive. The tea Party movement was set up to encompass THEIR grievances as well.

The Tea Party's NEVER addressed ANY racial grievances for ANY group.
<
<
"Yeah, that’s a real smart plan for winning the hearts and minds of the millions of fed up white people in this country. And conservatives wonder why they never make any progress, or win any big battles?
<
<
Racial separatism is a losing proposition. It's also a flawed strategy, genetically. Genetic diversity delivers better outcomes. That's why in the animal kingdom mutts are almost always smarter and more adaptable than pure breeds.

Racial separatism is NOT America's fight. Economic liberty, respect for private property rights, reining government's powers and limiting its actions AND holding all Americans to the SAME standards ARE America's fights.
<
<
"It’s fine for white women to marry black men, but two men getting married is a big deal?" (anonymous)
<
<
You're sounding a lot like a white version of UTS!

Traditional inter-racial Marraiges (white-black, white-Asian, black-Hispanic, etc.) are STILL heterosexual aren't they?

Besides, the ONLY reason most Americnas oppose homosexual MARRIAGE is because they believe it can and will be used as a judicial end around to force Churches to Marry gays...just as 2/3s of Americans oppose gay MARRIAGE, 2/3s of Americans support Civil Unions for gays with the same benefits and privileges of Marriage.

As a parent I think most people would want their offspring to Marry well, to Marry a good and decent spouse, someone honest, hardworking and someone who holds to most of the same values they do...looks are superfluous, as "beauty really IS in the eye of the beholder."
<
<
"Interracial marriage is hunky dory, but high taxes are an abomination?" (anonymous)
<
<
In a word YES.

Higher taxes reduce revenues, kill prosperity and deliver widespread deprivation or poverty.

Inter-racial Marriages do nothing at all to harm the race.....the human race, that is.
<
<
"Immigration is bad because we’re replacing the founding stock of this country, but it’s just dandy for the founding stock of this country to breed themselves out of existence by “marrying” blacks?" (anonymous)
<
<
What about whites (and blacks) Marrying Asians and Hispanics, doesn't that breed those races out of existence too???

What truly separates people is IDEOLOGY not ethnicity.

A Conservative Asian has more in common with a Conservative black or white than he does with a liberal Asian. Same goes for any other group, as well.

Racial separatism is rooted in racial hatred and there's really no reason for that. UTS feels justified in hating whites despite his privileged status in a predominantly white country and you feel justified in hating blacks because...(who knows?)...maybe you've run into too many blacks like UTS?

Somehow I doubt that, because most people who hold to such reflexive emotional hatreds really never purposely interacted with people of the group they claim to hate.

It's ECONOMICS....it's IDEOLOGY, it's NOT ethnicity.

JMK said...

ADDENDUM:

I don't know your background or anything else....you could be a disgruntled white guy (as designed to appear) or you could be a malicious liberal (black or white) just looking to make it appear that Conservatism and such Conservative blogs and forums breed and embrace such xenophobic hate (a liberal projection).

Maybe you're really young and frustrated.

When I was back in College, back when I knew EVERYTHING that I later came to doubt and reconfigure, I did for awhile embrace the view that the world represented a fierce struggle between various ethnic/racial factions amidst a world of lack, limitation and scarcity. Of course, at that point in my life, I accepted fully the liberal mantra of "life is a zero sum game" - for every winner, there had to be 100 losers.

The Capitalist or free market ethos is rooted in the idea that there is no lack, limitation or scarcity with regard to man's imagination and creativity and that free minds and free people can overcome just about any challenge, no matter how dire.

Without question, the liberal ethos feeds on ethnic and racial animosity. SEE Walter E Williams great article on Marx's own racial bigotry; http://www.wnd.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=50724

That has never been more clear than it is today, as South America has erupted in a virulent embrace of rampant anti-semitism.

Recently I commented on that issue like this, “Sometimes I ask myself if Hitler wasn’t right to finish with that race, through the famous holocaust, because if there are people who are harmful to this country, they are the Jews, the Isaelites.” (David Romero Ellner, Executive Director of Radio Globo, Honduras Sept 25, 2009)

Those were the words of one of Honduras' leading Zelaya supporters, who began his political career as a radical activist and one of the founders of the far-Left People’s Revolutionary Union.

He’s also a convicted incest-pedophile, who did some jail time for sexually molesting his own daughter - a penchant, for whatever reasons, not at all atypical of the Leftist persona. Ever notice how the far-Left loves defending pedophiles, from the ongoing reflexive media defense of pedophile director, Roman Polansky to the ACLU’s recent defense of NAMBLA over that groups disseminating information on how to abduct and rape children? It is a veritable obsession on the Left.

Moreover, Mr. Romero Ellner’s comments merely followed up Manuel Zelaya’s own charge that he was being “subjected to high-frequency radiation” from outside the Brazilian Embassy where he was staying, and blaming “Israeli mercenaries” for his travails.

Worse still, for America’s Zelaya supporters, is the facts laid out by New York District Attorney General, Robert Morgenthau, who recently spoke at the Brookings Institute acknowledging that, “Iran and Venezuela are beyond the courtship phase. We know they are creating a cozy financial, political and military partnership and that BOTH countries have strong ties to Hezzbolah and Hamas.”

It’s extremely vital that all Christians come to understand why the Left reviles the Jews? It’s the same reason why Hitler, Stalin and ALL leading Leftists to this day STILL despise the Jews?

It’s because the Jews, more than any other group, represent the commercial and merchant (entrepreneurial) class...from their ranks have sprung many of the most ardent Capitalists. The Jews are, as more than one Leftist has lamented, “incorrigibly Capitalistic.” That’s the reason Hitler hated them and it’s the same reason ALL Leftists hate the Jews.

Ironically enough, it can be said without any exaggeration that “the Left is incorrigibly anti-Christian and anti-Semitic...

Whether you're aware of it, or not, you've embraced a horrific Leftist ideology, one that is completely antithetical to America's Founding design.

MrsGrpaevine said...

This video is highly inaccurate, and it's not even worth the time it takes to type to try and dispel the lack of truth.

Amazing how black women destroyed the black man, yet slavery paid no part in breaking up the family unit of blacks.

Let me get this straight...

kidnapped family from homes, bring them across seas like cattle, separate men from their families, make women work right along the side of men toiling, disallowing marriage, and selling their kids to other slave master away, had nothing to do with the breakdown of black family, BUT...

...liberal ideology did...(LMBO)

This isn't even satire, it's just stupidity!

JMK said...

"Let me get this straight...

"kidnapped family from homes, bring them across seas like cattle, separate men from their families, make women work right along the side of men toiling, disallowing marriage, and selling their kids to other slave master away, had nothing to do with the breakdown of black family, BUT...

"...liberal ideology did...(LMBO) (MGV)
<
<
"In the 1890 Census, one generation after slavery, 80 percent of black households were mom, dad and kids. It stayed that way through the 1950s, when the census counted 77 percent of black families as united, compared to 85 percent of white families."

I knew that fact.

Walter E Williams and Thomas Sowell mention it frequently in their works.

JMK said...

You're claiming slavery destroyed the black family?

If so, why didn't it destroy the Irish family?

"The Irish slave trade began when James II sold 30,000 Irish prisoners as slaves to the New World. His Proclamation of 1625 required Irish political prisoners be sent overseas and sold to English settlers in the West Indies. By the mid 1600s, the Irish were the main slaves sold to Antigua and Montserrat. At that time, 70% of the total population of Montserrat were Irish slaves.

"Ireland quickly became the biggest source of human livestock for English merchants. The majority of the early slaves to the New World were actually white.

"From 1641 to 1652, over 500,000 Irish were killed by the English and another 300,000 were sold as slaves. Ireland's population fell from about 1,500,000 to 600,000 in one single decade. Families were ripped apart as the British did not allow Irish dads to take their wives and children with them across the Atlantic. This led to a helpless population of homeless women and children. Britain's solution was to auction them off as well.

"During the 1650s, over 100,000 Irish children between the ages of 10 and 14 were taken from their parents and sold as slaves in the West Indies, Virginia and New England. In this decade, 52,000 Irish (mostly women and children) were sold to Barbados and Virginia. Another 30,000 Irish men and women were also transported and sold to the highest bidder. In 1656, Cromwell ordered that 2000 Irish children be taken to Jamaica and sold as slaves to English settlers.

"Many people today will avoid calling the Irish slaves what they truly were: Slaves. They'll come up with terms like "Indentured Servants" to describe what occurred to the Irish. However, in most cases from the 17th and 18th centuries, Irish slaves were nothing more than human cattle.

"As an example, the African slave trade was just beginning during this same period. It is well recorded that African slaves, not tainted with the stain of the hated Catholic theology and more expensive to purchase, were often treated far better than their Irish counterparts.

"African slaves were very expensive during the late 1600s (50 Sterling). Irish slaves came cheap (no more than 5 Sterling). If a planter whipped or branded or beat an Irish slave to death, it was never a crime. A death was a monetary setback, but far cheaper than killing a more expensive African.

"The English masters quickly began breeding the Irish women for both their own personal pleasure and for greater profit. Children of slaves were themselves slaves, which increased the size of the master's free workforce. Even if an Irish woman somehow obtained her freedom, her kids would remain slaves of her master. Thus, Irish moms, even with this new found emancipation, would seldom abandon their kids and would remain in servitude...

JMK said...

"...In time, the English thought of a better way to use these women (in many cases, girls as young as 12) to increase their market share: The settlers began to breed Irish women and girls with African men to produce slaves with a distinct complexion. These new "mulatto" slaves brought a higher price than Irish livestock and, likewise, enabled the settlers to save money rather than purchase new African slaves.

"This practice of interbreeding Irish females with African men went on for several decades and was so widespread that, in 1681, legislation was passed "forbidding the practice of mating Irish slave women to African slave men for the purpose of producing slaves for sale." In short, it was stopped only because it interfered with the profits of a large slave transport company.

England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century. Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia."

http://afgen.com/forgotten_slaves.html

THAT IS the sad, historical record. To this day, Ireland has a Memorial Day to the victims of the Irish Slave Trade and Cromwell's attempted genocide of the Celtic race.


For more historical accounts of the Irish Salve Trade, SEE:

http://couchtripper.com/forum2/viewtopic.php?p=70968

http://students.ou.edu/K/Asher.A.Killian-1/story5.htm

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/forum/thread483684/pg5

Zabeth said...

@CBW I see your point and for the most part I can agree; however, I take issue when people place the burden solely on BW's shoulders. I mean if we're called a community than were made up of more than just women.

MrsGrapevine said...

@ JMK:

1)It did affect the Irish community and the Irish family, creating extreme poverty well into 19th century. Things became so bad that many Irish families migrated to the United States in great numbers during the 1820's.

Once in the United States they were discriminated against and were apart of the slum ghetto culture. It took generations for them to establish community and family. They were able to do so because their men were granted rights of citizenship unlike blacks at that time who were still slaves.

Not to mention the tension between England and Ireland that lasted until the end of the 20th century.

2)By your own argument the height of that "Irish" slave trade was during 1600's. Slavery for blacks didn't end to nearly 200 years later, and it wasn't until 40 years ago that blacks had the same rights and privileges that is guaranteed by the constitutuion as their white counterparts. In those 40 years the poverty rate among blacks has gone from 47% to 22%.

3) Do you think the Irish people weren't on welfare, both here and abroad. Hello 38% of welfare goes to white people now, who weren't decedents of slaves, and most of them are single mothers. White women if you haven't noticed are very independent and raising children as single mothers. Move over black family, because whites are well on their way to surpassing us in the rate of divorce. So I guess those "doormat" women he defended aren't taken it anymore, either....

4)Why is the black woman the demise of the black family when she adopted the same principles of the white feminist movement, yet, white women aren't? Please this man doesn't know anything about the rift between black feminist (womanist) and white feminist. A little research would have gone a long way. Black women actually embraced the family unit, and often defined feminism in the context of their relationship to the black man.

5) This is just an ignorant black man trying to explain his attraction to white women over black women, instead just saying he prefers them. If you are a black man that like white skin more than black skin, then just say that, don't create a whole documentary of lies degrading the black woman. I guess he hasn't seen Girls Gone Wild, or been to Padre or Cabos for spring break. If he had, he would know that white women are just as "immoral" and it's a sign of the culture, the American culture. I remember when black people use to laugh at how bad white children were and the lack of discipline in the white community. Now we are moving to the suburbs and raising our children the same.

6)I don't know one black woman who has married a white man and became submissive. They are still the same outgoing strong woman they were, they just found someone who could handle it, instead of using it as an excuse for shortcomings....

Conservative Black Woman said...

MGV~If slavery is the cause of the pathology we face today then we are doomed because it happened and we can't re-write history. But I submit to you that slavery has nothing to do with the high rate of illegimacy taking place in Black America. To continue to use slavery as an excuse is a losing proposition.

My maternal grandparents were perhaps one or two generations out of slavery and they were married for 50 years. My parents were married for 35 years until my dad died. My father's parents (judging from the pictures look like they were slaves--but I digress)were married for 45 or 50 years. Each of their eleven children married, every single one of them (even the gay one...lol)

To use slavery as an excuse is a pathetic down right imbecilic cop-out. Unless or until Black America gets truthful about our part in our self-destruction the cycle will repeat -- until we reach extinction --which isn't a far-fetched proposition seeing as how we are not a "growing" segment of the population.

MrsGrapevine said...

@ CBW:

I didn't use slavery as "the" pathology of the breakdown of the black family, but "a" pathology. The reason black women had the skills to leave their family to work is because they acquired them from slavery. Black women have been working since their inception into the United States, and that pathology is passed on from generation to generation, just like the music, the food, and even the way we worship. Their are so many things that black people do, and they don't know why they do it. It just has been passed on from generation to generation.

So, I'm not saying blame slavery, but how can you discount the affects it had on breaking up families? How can you discount the affects it had in personifying the "strong black woman" image? You and I both know that stereotype has existed long before the feminist movement.

Today, if I had to pick one reason for the demise of the black family, it's lack of faith or religion. I believe not living a Christian lifestyle is the biggest cause of the decline, today. Followed by crack.

Crack literally lead to grandparents raising their grandchildren, and women leaving the home right along with the man. You had a generation (x) of kids in the inner city who raised themselves. Black on black crime, gangs, glorified lifestyle, and the over population of prison with black men.

I don't think slavery is the excuse for anything today, but when you know why you are prone to do certain things, it helps in changing the pattern of behavior you're passing on.

JMK said...

My response to you was directed at your comments not anything that was in the YouTube video posted.

To wit, slavery didn’t destroy the black OR the Irish family. Apparently I must defend that opinion once again.

In addressing the Irish slave trade you overlooked the most damning evidence AGAINST the “slavery destroyed the black family” argument is, "In the 1890 Census, one generation after slavery, 80 percent of black households were mom, dad and kids. It stayed that way through the 1950s, when the census counted 77 percent of black families as united, compared to 85 percent of white families."

The Irish family didn’t disintegrate in the wake of that attempted genocide, it actually got stronger and tighter out of necessity.

According to that account above, “England continued to ship tens of thousands of Irish slaves for more than a century. Records state that, after the 1798 Irish Rebellion, thousands of Irish slaves were sold to both America and Australia.” So, that group was afflicted by the slave trade for a very long time.

The Irish predominated in Australia because it was settled as an Irish prison colony, while the Irish came to America in numbers in accordance with other equally despised groups from Europe. The largest influx of Irish to America came just prior to the Civil War, during the “Potato Famine” (another genocidal assault on that group, according to the Irish and a “tragic crop failure” according to the English.

That’s when the bulk of my father’s family came here, to Boston and New York and they comprised around 80% of the Union’s Army in that conflict.

For their part, the Irish have a long-standing hatred of the English and HAVE fought against the English in nearly every conflict around the globe. It’s been documented that even in WWI and WWII the Irish would fuel German ships off its coasts.

The Irish are despised by the British for being “the last tribal whites of Europe.” That hatred is returned in kind. I saw it in my father, who grew up raised by a father who was hired as a bus dispatcher when the NYC bus lines were privately owned and saw that his father could never rise above that rank. He’d train others who’d quickly jump over him because, as he was told all the time, “he didn’t have a Mason’s ring.” At the time, Roman Catholics couldn’t become Free Masons, so that made it a convenient way to keep that group “in their place,” just as Jews, blacks and others were kept in theirs as well.

At the time almost any WASP would argue, “Why should we share the bounty of a culture and an economy we created?”

My father was the first person in his family not to Marry a Celt. My Mom’s family was from northern Italy and Corsica.

Because of that, I was raised virtually without an ethnicity. On Staten Island, where I grew up, the area was overwhelmingly Irish and Italian and even the politics of that area was based along those ethnic lines, the Irish were the face of Staten Island’s Democratic Party and the Italians were the face of Staten Island’s Republican Party. That actually made sense in that the Italians were generally far more entrepreneurial than the Irish. Whereas the Irish predominated in the Military and Civil Service, especially in the Police and Fire Departments, the Italians predominated in the building trades, or owned their own businesses. My Mom’s father, after being sent back to Northern Italy, when his father abandoned the family, came back after WW I and worked briefly as a carpenter before opening a butcher shop that he expanded into a three-store concern by the time I was a young child.

My father’s family had been involved in NYC politics since the time of Tammany Hall, some serving as Ward bosses, who were paid to “make sure their areas “voted right,” getting the Tammany folks out no matter what condition they may have been in and making sure those opposed to Tammany didn’t get to vote at all, even if that took “cracking a few heads.”

JMK said...

As to, “it wasn't until 40 years ago that blacks had the same rights and privileges that is guaranteed by the Constitution as their white counterparts,” are you talking about voting rights?

Because black men had the right to vote right after the Civil War. The 13th, 14th, and 15th Amendments to the U.S. Constitution were passed following the Civil War, in the late 1860s. They outlawed slavery and extended civil rights and suffrage (voting rights) to former slaves. Black women, like ALL women were accorded the right to vote via the 19th Amendment, which gave American women the right to vote in 1920. A full half century ahead of the women in Switzerland, who didn’t get suffrage until the mid-1970s.

As far as “Black women actually embraced the family unit, and often defined feminism in the context of their relationship to the black man,” goes, the issue there was that the “feminist movement in America has largely been, for better or worse (yes, I think worse) a pro-Lesbian one. No wonder then that more traditionalist black women didn’t really fit into that movement’s primary ethos.

As for, “I don't know one black woman who has married a white man and became submissive. They are still the same outgoing strong woman they were, they just found someone who could handle it...” I don’t know what that’s in reference to.

I am Married to a woman born and raised in Jamaica. She’s a great person and she’s also the best friend I ever had.

Like I said earlier, I was raised virtually without an ethnicity. Whenever I’d ask my parents whether I were Irish or Italian, I was told, “You’re American, that’s what you are. You have more in common with a Chinese-America kid born in China-town then you do with any kid born in Limerick or Genoa.” My family was always OK with whoever I’d bring home, so long as they were “nice” people.

I never had a daughter, but if I had, I’d have raised to be self-sufficient. No woman should ever put herself in the position of being dependent on someone else. One thing I’ve admired about the black women I’ve known is that they don’t do that. They are very independent and free-thinking.

Most people are toughest on their own group.

JMK said...

Most people are toughest on their own group.

Today, the vast majority of black Americans are middle class.

Poverty is a pathology.

Poverty, like wealth is generally the result of various and specific behaviors. People CREATE wealth...and they CREATE poverty as well.

The issue of poverty is extra-racial, that is OUTSIDE the scope of "race."

Those, like UTS, who confuse with race with poverty, or claim "poverty is a code word for black," actually block any real understanding of and ability to reduce poverty across the board.

There is far less motivation to address poverty, when addressed as a racial issue, or focused on urban or black poverty.

Chattel slavery has been an affliction of mankind from the beginning of time. America and Western Europe were hundreds of years ahead of their time, as chattel slavery STILL exists throughout most of the world, in large tracts of Asia, throughout the mid-East and throughout sub-Saharan Africa.

Past transgressions are NOT an excuse for bad behavior by those of us living today.

Ivyalf said...

I watched the videos.
But I can't say that I got anything out of them.
The main point was that the Black Women were the cause of all the problems in the black family.
The fact was remarked that 70% of all black children are born to single mothers. No mention was made of the black men who helped create these black children. So should all these children be aborted.. As their future just seems to be a jail cell.
No solutions just a list of how bad BW are. And that BM need to look for other women

MrsGrapevine said...

@ JMK:

1)Not all of that was a response to you, some of it was a response to the video.

In the video the guy claims that when black women marry white men they become submissive.

2) I didn't over look your comment about blacks and family post civil war, I'm researching it, because D.E. Dubois has a study on the break down of the black family compared to whites during the 1890's and it conflicts with your statement regarding the census, and so my response will be long. But I have to find where you got that statistics and check the source. I think you're right about family units, but not about marriage within those units. Part of the problem discussed in the video is black women not getting married. I just don't have the time right now. But, it's coming...it will be a long separate post.

3) Blacks were granted the rights on paper, and after slavery they were able to vote, but that's my point, those rights were taken away from them by the courts in laws such as plessy v ferguson that upheld segregation ("separate but equal), which lead to Jim Crowe laws and legal racism.

Also during this time the Ku Klux Klan gained power, and the rain on domestic terror in the South began.

It's only been 40 years since blacks were truly considered equal both legally and socially. So it takes time to turn things around, but it will be done. The poverty rate has significantly reduced during that time period as well; literally cut in half in a generation.

4) My point isn't to blame slavery for everything that happens today, my point is that the breakdown of the black family is due to many things and not just the "lascivious nature" of a black woman. In fact I think the breakdown of families is an American problem, as divorce rate is increasing amongst all races, except for Asians.

Pamela said...

I must disagree with the inference that people that see themselves in these videos would be the only ones that would react to these videos. Hatred should be called out and rejected wherever it is found. I do my best to deal with people by their actions and motivations. I consciously try NOT to deal with people in categories whenever possible. He refused to do this but totally denigrated bw that were successful and described those that were not as ghetto type bw. Basically when you get done watching this madness no bw is worth anything or desirable. That is wrong pure and simple.

I saw all three videos on another blog months ago. The one object lesson that can be learned from these videos is to see the mindset of SOME bm that refuse to accept responsibility for their own failure. When I have had struggles in my life I did what I could to change my circumstances. Not once did I blame bm for my troubles. Maybe this male can quit wasting his time talking to the sorry excuses for men and do something productive with his life. He obviously has nothing else going for him. He is probably wet behind the ears having not lived long enough to make any sense yet.

JMK said...

"In the video the guy claims that when black women marry white men they become submissive." (MGV)
<
<
I streamed/skimmed through the video, to be honest, as the issues presented were "not my problem."

One thing I do believe that Jesus Christ espoused was looking inward...."Before you'd take the splinter out of your neighbor's eye, first take the moat (plank) from out your own."

That's true in that the ONLY person ANY of us can change is OURSELVES.

Thoughts are real, physical things. You CAN control own your thoughts and not just "let them happen" and those who do control their minds, those who control their minds, then control their lives, and once you completely control your own life, you control your own destiny.

The Irish were not only wholesale enslaved on a wholesale scale at around the same time as blacks, but they were victims of an attempted genocide by the British. The Jews were victims of an attempted genocide by Hitler's socialist thugs much more recently and the family unit in those two groups was NOT destroyed.

What has destroyed the black family more than anything else has been the numerous (perhaps) well-intentioned dependency programs AND the pandemic of embracing "victimization" as though that comes with some entitlement.

A GREAT video on that topic can be found at;http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1084394769627714346#

I have been with a number of black women and NONE were ever "submissive" in any sense of the word.

Some doltish men see women who actively use their sexuality to their advantage as "fun" and "submissive," but in truth, most such women become jaded over how "stupid" most men are.

Who's the bigger dope, who's more stupid, the women who "dances" (struts around) naked on a stage, or the guy throwing his hard earned money $1 at a time at that woman?

It's the guy....hands down.

In my experience, women from ALL backgrounds are strong-willed, focused on bottom-line issues, like paying the Bills and value and demand accountability from the men they involve themselves with.

The kind o guy who "gets over," by refusing to pay child support is generally a bum...and THANKFULLY, dead-beat Dad laws have been tightened and the penalties stiffened as much as those for DUI have been.

There was a time when we winked at impaired driving too. Those days are gone.
<
<
"Blacks were granted the rights on paper, and after slavery they were able to vote, but that's my point, those rights were taken away from them by the courts in laws such as plessy v ferguson that upheld segregation ("separate but equal), which lead to Jim Crowe laws and legal racism." (MGV)
<
<
Blacks in America were badly treated. Since Nixon's tenure, however, they are the ONLY group to have had a federal "Jim Crow-styled" legislation that discriminated IN their favor (affirmative action).

Test bias has been proven to hold no water.

Disparate impact likewise has been proven NOT to be indicative of any deliberate or intentional discrimination....and yet, race-based preferences STILL exist on the Books.
<
<
"My point isn't to blame slavery for everything that happens today, my point is that the breakdown of the black family is due to many things and not just the "lascivious nature" of a black woman." (MGV)
<
<
As I said, I wouldn't blame that on the woman either, BUT, I would blame it on a "lascivious" culture that glorifies unaccountable sex as "good fun," even sexualizes children, hasn't until recently demanded accountability from the men who father illegitimate children and has bought into a foolish sense that past "victimization" correlates into some degree of entitlement or special consideration today.

It clearly does not.

There are a myriad of social problems that have created the current mess, but "the legacy of slavery" is not one of them, in my view.

jodetoad said...

I could only get the 1st video to play, the 2nd said it was removed for terms of use, or some such.

I would have said the first was some guy with a personal problem, maybe some gal rejected him for a loser and he got an attitude. Seems to have an angry case of the 'poor me' self-pity pot. He blamed mainly black women, but also Oprah, white women's lib, white men, and black male losers. We are supposed to believe he's a great guy, victimized by all these mean women...

But it seems at least some folks here take him seriously... If I come across as ignorant, it's because I am, I guess. But this is the second post I've seen here about tension and blame between black men and women.

I'm a white gal, and don't know many blacks, not many black people live in the rural CA area I live in. I've been going to blogs of black writers, because I'm confused about some things. For example, recent polls showing that black people went from 55% thinking US society was fair and decent in February, to only 14% now. I think of black people as darker skinned individuals, and have trouble thinking "blacks think this" or "blacks believe that". I'm not used to thinking of people as a group instead of as individuals.

I knew a few black people pretty well a few years back, I am an alcoholic, and met them in AA. We all had the same problem, but each of us is unique, I never saw anything they all had in common except the drinking/drugs thing.

You may know that we alcoholics are pretty good at blaming our problems on everybody except ourselves. I learned in AA that if I find myself doing that, not only is the problem probably my own doing, but also that as long as I blame everybody else, I can't solve the problem. The whole idea of blame has never done anything good, in my life anyway.

Anyway, that's who I am, sort of an introduction. I don't know about tension between black men and women. But it still feels wrong to buy into the idea that blaming men, or blaming women, is a solution to anything. It makes more sense to value the opinion of someone who values you as a person, and let the people who are angry about generalizations go be mad someplace else.

Lawrence said...

I love the video ...Thank you for my spot around 8:55 into the Video.

Yes I'm a very Good Man!!


Mr.L

Ensayn1 said...

I saw the video, part one and almost gagged literally.

@MrsGrapevine, This strong black woman image comes for the matrilineal/matrifocal society in place at the time the Brutisch arrived on these shores and saw Black women conducting council meetings among the people here among other civil positions. The Brutisch were not used to women in politics, neither were the African men, who were the main source of living stock to come from Africa during the slavery time period, they were both from partriarchal societies.
But, Black society here in the Americas before Columbus was run by women. And by far the most destructive slave trade that took place here was the trade of indigenous Black people of the Americas being forced from the so called Caribbean to the now U.S. and vice versa, not from Africa.

@Jmk, it is so, that many many Irish were shipped as slaves to the Americas, yet there were no laws written or unwritten that discriminated against the Irish as long as there have been against the Black people of the Americas. Slavery was not the destroyer as many Black people believe, it was Jim Crowe, its siblings and offspring that has been the real destroyer. And NO other people have lived under such oppression for as long.

Is this an excuse for the ills today? I really don't know, but I do know each individual can clean up themselves, educate themselves, speak better, speak positivly every day. This would begin a new cycle.

Uffda said...

Anonymous (with the Uncle Tom rant):

The only one obsessed with race is you.

MrsGrapevine said...

@ JMK:

"Higher taxes reduce revenues, kill prosperity and deliver widespread deprivation or poverty." (JMK)

Then why did the economic gaps increase during Reagan and Bush years? Why has the poverty level increased over the past few years?

Everything you have just named is happening, and we have one of the lowest tax burdens of the top bracket. Not only do we have one of the lowest of the top bracket, we are making the bottom bracket carry a higher burden.

http://www.ntu.org/main/page.php?PageID=19

Let me guess you answer is going to be because of spending, but you can't cut taxes without first cutting spending. I'm still having a hard time understanding why Bush cut taxes but increased spending, and couldn't foresee an economic crisis...

I rather have higher taxes, than having to borrow money from China to fund wars we should have paid for.

Now we have lower taxes and higher debt, and deficit...

Smile said...

It's difficult to even respond. It seems that there is nothing said that can be helpful because there is no correction allowed.

If something isn't offered and there isn't a 'reaching out', people are accused of not caring.

If critique is offered, people are accused of picking on the victim.

Though my statements are general in scope, it seems there is a 'damned if ya do and damned if ya don't' situation.

If people will be damned no matter what, why bother.

There remains a refusal to receive any intended correction. Even if we could agree as to why we are where we're at, there would be no correction allowed for making things better, that would be blaming the victim.

Yes, women are strong. Women give birth to all children. Some of these children are male. It would seem that women have always an opportunity for the greatest influence on the next generation. Perhaps this as well is too strong a criticism and hints at too much self responsibility.

If there continues a zero sum mentality to all correction....can't we see that we'll miss out on some needed correction? As we pass down this rejection of correction, kids act out with all kinds of angst towards it as well. Yes, there are always problems to be found in yesterday, in all people in myriad areas. A better way for individuals is for individuals to enact a better way individually. We have to start somewhere. So called 'communities' are made up of individuals. Even if we don't experience the benefit of the correction in our own life, we should teach our children a better way so things can truly be better.

Almost in any 'critique' we could find some grains (or truck loads...whatever) that we could utilize for a better way and self correction. Where is the human condition so perfect that we don't need to continually be self correcting?

Let's quit beating each other over the head, as if we know the intents in someone's heart. If there is a grain or the shoe fits then self correct. If not fine, hopefully there will be allowed correction in a more appropriate area.

JMK said...

"Higher taxes reduce revenues, kill prosperity and deliver widespread deprivation or poverty." (JMK)
<
<
"Then why did the economic gaps increase during Reagan and Bush years? Why has the poverty level increased over the past few years? (MGV)
<
<
Widespread income disparities are very GOOD for the economy.

I take it on faith that no one here is asserting anything so frivolous as, "most skills, like most people are fairly equal and there just shouldn't be some skills valued at 50 or even 100 times that of others."

In fact, I've never heard that inanity asserted, so I don't believe I've ever really crafted an argument against that claim.

Suffice to say, some skills (ie. thoracic surgery, investment banking, patent law, etc) are so rare and difficult to master that the demand is far greater than the supply and those skills ARE rightly valued at 50 or even 100 times that of more average, mundane and plentiful skills like teaching HS history, construction or emergency service work.

Wide disparities in income do not cause, nor are even related, in any meaningful way, to poverty rates.

The G W Bush ACROSS-the-BOARD tax cuts greatly INCREASED tax revenues!

Critics inanely charge that "If people took the amount of income upfront and non-deferred with higher rates in place, even MORE revenue."

But that's utter NONSENSE. Fact is, the top 10% of income earners already pay over 70% of all income taxes. As you'd expect those earners have the most valuable skills, fuel much of the investment that creates new jobs AND they have the MOST "disposable income."

When tax rates are lowered (down to about the 20% level) those folks take more and more of their income UPFRONT and non-taxx deferred, likewise when tax rates rise, they SAVE by deferring more of their income in tax-deferred vehicles....and THAT (taking care of themselve and their families) is what LOWERS tax revenues, because even with across-the-board tax hikes, that 70% of income taxes that top 10% of earners pays CANNOT be made up.

That ultimately translates into less investment and LESS job creation.

The idiocy that "Well, then the government will hire more people," is just that, idiocy. ith shrinking revenues the government CAN'T hire more people....and even if the federal government borrowed to hire more, state and local governments would have to lay more workers off due to falling revenues (those entities MUST balance their books and can't borrow like the fed) and that would more than offset any federal hiring.

Ultimately job creation is a private sector function.

As you've agreed, I've proven that G W Bush's administration was as Keynesian as Richard Nixon's and despite the increased revenues from those tax cuts, that adminitration spent MORE (even adjusted for inflation) than even LBJ did on reckless and irresponsible social spending.

The foolish bi-partisan effort to "increase mortgage lending to low-income Americans" is what caused the global credit crisis. That too, was a Keynesian scheme.

Supply Siders (like myself) look at such things (the HUGE disparity in homeownership rates) and say, "Well, poorer people should rent and save up until they can put down the 20% needed to get a conventional mortgage."

I think we can both agree that the idea of government pushing banks to extend more loans to lower income individuals harms the more affluent home buyers by also raising their lending rates and ultimately creates the kind of "credit socialism" (the printing of credit without backing) that resulted in the housing bubble that popped in 2008.

G W Bush's administration moved AWAY from Reagan-Gingrich Supply-Side policies and embarked on a Nixonian Keynesian agenda. Barrack Obama is following that up with a Carter-Redux....even MORE Keynesianism.

More bad policie always brings about more bad results.

JMK said...

CORRECTION: "Critics inanely charge that "If people took the SAME amount of income upfront, non-TAX deferred with higher TAX rates in place, the government would've taken in even MORE revenue."

And that IS utter nonsense, as I said.

uglyblackjohn said...

IMO - The problem is that there aren't enough people who share your point of view.
Many Blacks seem to think that everyone should think and act the same.
While I'm still a liberal, the opposing view is what helps to refine my own.

Belle said...

It is a very sad day when Black women's self esteem has been beaten so low that they actually agree with those who hate them and blame them for all of the problems in the Black community.

I believe at the point when Black women are fully brainwashed into this line of thinking, and they seriously begin to be fully accepting of the Black male punching bag and scapegoat role, I will separate myself from the Black community completely. Of course I will always be Black, but I will feel isolated. Because I could never be apart of something so ridiculous and illogical. I mean it is shocking really. All the evidence and stats lie plainly in front of everyone to see and Black women are STILL content to take all the blame. Despite the fact that negative stats on Black men are steadily INCREASING and negative stats on Black women besides those that involve Black men (i.e. single motherhood) are steadily DECREASING. It should be obvious to any outsider and unbiased insider who the real problem is, yet most knowledgeable Black men are too cowardly to say it and it seems more and more Black women are becoming too down on themselves to protest the hatred directed their way.

Very sad day indeed.

ar said...

Oppression is having it's day. I didn't do it. You didn't do it.

That's a truth. Neither of us, none of us wish it on the other.

Purposeful agendas is what i see. Respect amoung each other has as much meaning as there are seven letters in it.

Time has taken it's toll, friend. Distance from Him who put us here clouds thinking. Tossing Him out is proof.

An oppressor with purposeful intent
between you and I. Flip open that dictionary and look up oppression or babel on.

Foreigners in the white house from Her roots; Rome-all roads lead to Rome. Not unlike the greatest lie ever told; satan doesn't exist, She has two faces. One for public and another behind Everything of any importance in the world, she was there first - death followed; still does.

The political zoo we find ourselves in; she put there with her Counsel on Foreign Relations(CFR) and Federal Reserve foreign bankers purposeful intent.

Lawyers run the country. Lawyers are not legal citizens while they hold a "bar" license. Nobels and Titles Act Thirteenth (hidden) Amendment.

Between you and me, I think we have done quite well considering what has come Against US, I am rooting for us the people.

Whoever is running the show... Nope, Rome runs it. Believe her way or die, how's that for religion (to bind, look it up). Another religion sounds similar too. Guessed it yet?

The first oppressor invented the second. If I kill you and me because you won't believe like me, how does that warrent 60 virgins? (ten died in the explosion.)

Anways, consider for an instant that some one has ochestrated all the crap against us. I don't want division. Debate is everything - speak up with wisdom of History.



Good people speak up.

mabel said...

I recently came accross your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I dont know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.

Lucy

http://maternitymotherhood.net

Keep it real said...

I just found this blog. I have a comment about the posts from Anonymous from October 8, 2009 and October 9, 2009.

Those comments were copy/pasted from the following link http://www.thepoliticalcesspool.org/jamesedwards/2009/09/30/uncle-tom-lloyd-marcus-becomes-the-face-of-the-tea-party-movement/.

Just wanted to let you all know.

Anonymous said...

The speaker is harsh and angry. Why? What is there for him to be so angry about?