Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

I don't agree with most of the politics of Al Sharpton and the NAACP. I also don't think you can the NAACP is the reason there is still racism in the United States of America.

IG_urban wrote:
I understand perfectly, do you understand how passive aggressive your posts are?

Are you trying to be ironic? If asking questions is necessarily passive-aggressive, then you've gone right down the rabbit hole.

IG_urban wrote:
It is a FACT, once again, that if I initiated a NAAWP, I would be labeled a racist, and the NAACP would probably sue me as well.

No, it isn't a fact. It is a fact that you believe that if you created an NAAWP that the NAACP would sue you for racism, but is is not itself a fact that they would do so as you are dealing only in speculation and belief.

Again, you do not appear to understand what the words you are using actually mean.

IG_urban wrote:
That is racist, therefore, propagating racism.

Yes, were they to do that it would be.

IG_urban wrote:
If you look at their case record, a large number of them are similar to this scenario. If my aunt was murdered by a black man, and I called it a hate crime, I would be labeled as a racist.

No, not by current precedent. People have been tried, and convicted, on the basis of hate crimes against whites.

IG_urban wrote:
If I had my own coffee shop, and two homeless men, dressed identically entered my store, one white, one black, and the black man had excrement and urine all over him and I told him to leave, and a NAACP rep was in my store, I would probably get labeled as a racist. You can see it time and time again in the news. It's dirty double standards and cries for SPECIAL, not EQUAL rights.

Why are you so terribly concerned about what someone might call you? Do you not believe that you have the ability to defend yourself in the public press? Because you do, necessarily so.

IG_urban wrote:. If I made a NAAWP, the NAACP would call me racist.

The NAAWP has existed since our nations founding, it's called "mainstream America" or "The good o'l boy network" that controls much of politics, local government, industry, corporate culture, etc. and many of the ideals it held for many decades ARE racist.

A nation founded and built on the principles of subjugation and slavery can't help but have such racist underpinnings.

Thankfully we have made strides to move forward, but don't be fooled by whats on the surface: many white institutions, politicians, foundations, and special interest groups continue to push extremely racist political/ideological agendas. Only difference is the changing times have forced them to be more subtle about it, and they have shifted the central focus from the black skinned man to the brown skinned man.

Being worried about the NAACP at this point is passe to be honest.

The Hispanic is the new "N*gger"...

In light of tall the reports against me, I'm so glad I haven't read this thread or I'll get at least 5 more reports for calling people on their racism.

I have a great suspicion that you don't know what racism means; seeing as you seem to apply it to nationalities, rather than anything that has ever been defined as a 'race'.

I keep seeing the term "reverse racism". Stop it. There is no such thing. Racism is racism regarless of who's hating who. A white guy is a bigot towards a black guy.. racism. A black guy is racist towards a white guy... racism. Sorry to rant, but I can't stand that term.

an organization that finds offense in any situation or conversation, whether implied or imaginary, is in of itself, offensive. In this case, it just so happens to be racist, as well. I will agree partially with the "reverse racism" remark, but when you have a group of people fighting racism with racism, it does kind of fit the situation.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
and dogma, you need to quote people if you are going to be posting responses, nobody knows who you are talking to.

IG_urban wrote:

Polonius wrote:He raises a good point. the Thread topic is pretty flamey.

Like KK said, I write in some of my spare time, and if you want to grab people's attention you have to be provocative. I do not find it flamey at all. If you are offended, then I guess you are offended. I should think you can come in here and debate rather than take cheap shots at the thread title. If I had titled this topic "stupid article I found" or something of the sort, chances are it would have 500 views and 4 replies and pushed all the way to page 2 by now

I don't know what thread you've been following, but I was the main contributer to this thread. The thread is flamey because it states, as fact, a highly contentious claim. What's more, you're saying that you picked that to be provocative, which is to say that you wanted responses. It's a fine line between provocative and flamey, and I think that while you're convinced that apparently the NAACP is the reason we have racism in this country doesn't make it a fact, really.

I didn't say I was offended. If I was offended by every huffy white guy who thinks he's a persecuted minority, I would die of shock.

As for reverse racism, it's simply a smoke screen to ignore real racism. When white people are denied loans, or hassled by police, or can't rent an apartment in some neighborhoods, then maybe i'll have some sympathy. A few bigoted black people that hate whitey is not the same as a fairly pervasive effort by white people to keep black people out of public life, out of our schools, and generally in a disadvantaged state.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

CT GAMER wrote:

IG_urban wrote:. If I made a NAAWP, the NAACP would call me racist.

The NAAWP has existed since our nations founding, it's called "mainstream America" or "The good o'l boy network" that controls much of politics, local government, industry, corporate culture, etc. and many of the ideals it held for many decades ARE racist.

I have a new hero. You even resisted the urge to make the "NAAWP =GOP" joke.

Polonius wrote:As for reverse racism, it's simply a smoke screen to ignore real racism. When white people are denied loans, or hassled by police, or can't rent an apartment in some neighborhoods, then maybe i'll have some sympathy. A few bigoted black people that hate whitey is not the same as a fairly pervasive effort by white people to keep black people out of public life, out of our schools, and generally in a disadvantaged state.

But, when a business that is owned by some crusty old white guys can't bid on a government contract because it's been set aside for a disadvantaged business enterprise - what is it? Or when white students with better grades were denied by Michigan's law school for minorities to have a more diverse student body - what is it?

Now, it clearly isn't on the level that blacks and indians have experienced. But, when you're making decisions based on skin color, race, religion, etc. - it's bias. I wouldn't call it racism, but it also isn't equal opportunities.

And I don't know what group of white people are conspiring to deny blacks the opportunity to go to school or participate in public life, but I must have missed the memo. Or maybe I wasn't inbred enough. I'm fairly rednecky, so I don't think that was the criteria. If you're talking about what happened 50 years ago, then you need to make that clear. Sorry, but saying that there is some conspiracy to deny black people schools or 'public life', I don't see how you say that with a straight face. Oh, there are the individual bigots who do what they can get away with, but I just don't see it being widespread.

50 years ago, when blacks were denied service because of the color of their skin, and 100 years ago in the 'separate but equal' era, that was wrong, and fortunately we've moved past it. Now, racism hasn't been wiped out. But, considering the leader of the western world, the President of the United States, is an African American, I don't think it's a major factor today.

And going back to the OP. It's bunk. People are hearing what they want to hear. It's indignation over nothing to get some media attention. What it does is expose the NAACP to the 'boy who cried wolf' syndrome. When you go on the offensive over something like this, when you need some credibility to handle a real issue, you have none.

The Hispanic is the new "N*gger"...

I found myself thinking "It's better them than me" a few weeks ago then I locked my keys in the car and one of them came to help me. I felt like crap all that week.

I also had the same dark thoughts after 9/11.

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:
I understand perfectly, do you understand how passive aggressive your posts are?

Are you trying to be ironic? If asking questions is necessarily passive-aggressive, then you've gone right down the rabbit hole.

IG_urban wrote:
It is a FACT, once again, that if I initiated a NAAWP, I would be labeled a racist, and the NAACP would probably sue me as well.

No, it isn't a fact. It is a fact that you believe that if you created an NAAWP that the NAACP would sue you for racism, but is is not itself a fact that they would do so as you are dealing only in speculation and belief.

Again, you do not appear to understand what the words you are using actually mean.

IG_urban wrote:
That is racist, therefore, propagating racism.

Yes, were they to do that it would be.

IG_urban wrote:
If you look at their case record, a large number of them are similar to this scenario. If my aunt was murdered by a black man, and I called it a hate crime, I would be labeled as a racist.

No, not by current precedent. People have been tried, and convicted, on the basis of hate crimes against whites.

IG_urban wrote:
If I had my own coffee shop, and two homeless men, dressed identically entered my store, one white, one black, and the black man had excrement and urine all over him and I told him to leave, and a NAACP rep was in my store, I would probably get labeled as a racist. You can see it time and time again in the news. It's dirty double standards and cries for SPECIAL, not EQUAL rights.

Why are you so terribly concerned about what someone might call you? Do you not believe that you have the ability to defend yourself in the public press? Because you do, necessarily so.

You are not just asking questions. In fact, you, CT, and Polonius are being the typical liberal fire starters in this topic.

It is a fact. Sorry. You can call it an opinion all you want, it won't change the actuality of the situation.

I know exactly what I am talking about, and I am getting very tired with your odd, back-handed remarks.

Yes people have been tried and convicted, but the numbers are horribly skewed.

Polonius wrote:

IG_urban wrote:

Polonius wrote:He raises a good point. the Thread topic is pretty flamey.

Like KK said, I write in some of my spare time, and if you want to grab people's attention you have to be provocative. I do not find it flamey at all. If you are offended, then I guess you are offended. I should think you can come in here and debate rather than take cheap shots at the thread title. If I had titled this topic "stupid article I found" or something of the sort, chances are it would have 500 views and 4 replies and pushed all the way to page 2 by now

I don't know what thread you've been following, but I was the main contributer to this thread. The thread is flamey because it states, as fact, a highly contentious claim. What's more, you're saying that you picked that to be provocative, which is to say that you wanted responses. It's a fine line between provocative and flamey, and I think that while you're convinced that apparently the NAACP is the reason we have racism in this country doesn't make it a fact, really.

I didn't say I was offended. If I was offended by every huffy white guy who thinks he's a persecuted minority, I would die of shock.

As for reverse racism, it's simply a smoke screen to ignore real racism. When white people are denied loans, or hassled by police, or can't rent an apartment in some neighborhoods, then maybe i'll have some sympathy. A few bigoted black people that hate whitey is not the same as a fairly pervasive effort by white people to keep black people out of public life, out of our schools, and generally in a disadvantaged state.

Yes, I made the topic to attract people to it, so they would reply, so what?

In my opinion the NAACP propagates racism, yes. And it is very apparent. Whatever your political leaning may be, it still doesn't change the fact the NAACP keeps petty, quasi racism claims alive.

"If I was offended by every huffy white guy who thinks he's a persecuted minority" that had better not be directed at me. You have no idea who I am. Try not acting closed-minded liberal for once.

IG_urban wrote:
You are not just asking questions. In fact, you, CT, and Polonius are being the typical liberal fire starters in this topic.

I am just asking questions. The question may have been provocative, but it was meant to illustrate a significant inconsistency in your position. Namely, that you plainly understand fact vs. opinion when it favors you, but fail to do so when it does not.

As for being a fire starter: I've made one oblique reference to the conduct of the NAACP, I've not taken a significant stand on either side of the issue. I've primarily commented on your method of approaching this conversation, which may simply be the result of a particular passion.

IG_urban wrote:
It is a fact. Sorry. You can call it an opinion all you want, it won't change the actuality of the situation.

Apparently I was wrong about the above. It isn't a fact. There are no facts about the future. There are possibilities, and you can believe that they are very likely, but that belief does not turn a possibility into a fact. It can be a fact that something is possible, but the possible event is not itself a fact.

IG_urban wrote:
I know exactly what I am talking about, and I am getting very tired with your odd, back-handed remarks.

If you think that there are facts about the future, then no, you do not.

IG_urban wrote:
Yes people have been tried and convicted, but the numbers are horribly skewed.

I agree, but that isn't consistent with the argument that you are present, which deals in baseless certainty.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

helgrenze wrote:
There is no United Caucasian College Fund.

The United Negro College Fund is open to all ethnicities. I haven't received money from them, but I know white people who have.

helgrenze wrote:
There is no National Association for the Advancement of White People.

The NAACP is also integrated, and offers scholarship money to all ethnicities. I have received money from them.

There are many misconceptions pertaining to both of these organizations due only to their names.

Some of the views expressed by some posters in this thread have the appearance of being racist and have caused alerts from other users.

Being a racist is not in itself something that DakkaDakka.com can anything about.

Whatever someone's private views may be, the forum is a place for people to enjoy discussion of the fun hobby of wargames. It is not a political debate site, even though that is allowed in OT.

We are concerned with the way that users behave towards each other in the forum.

People who express racist, sexist and other "-ist" views even in polite terms are certain to attract the anger and resentment of other users. Doing this often could be interpreted as trolling and flame-baiting.

I believe this particular thread has reached its natural life-span, however I am leaving it unlocked for the moment as that will let it stay higher up the page for a bit, so people can read this message.

The card in the OP wasn't misheard as "Black Ho's", which could have resulted from the voice actors inflection. It was misheard as "Black Whores".

Sorry, but to me that is some-one looking for a reason to protest. They wanted to be offended by the card and picked a word that is difficult to make sound like the original word of "Hole".

Try it yourself... try saying "Hole" so that it sounds like "Whore".
Its like the old "play the record backwards" bit. People hearing things because they WANT to.

KK I respect your opinion.

helgrenze, thanks for your addition.

Without having directly heard the recording on the card, it seems odd to claim what was or was not being heard.

which proves you did not click on the original link....

Direct is a fantastic word, you should learn to use it.

Hmmm. Right.

You are aware that rather than being provocative, you are in fact just being out and out racist yourself yes?

Some people in life are simply arseholes, it's that simple. But you seem to feel that their skin colour has something to do with just what sort of arsehole they are. You have singled out the odd/ridiculous behaviour of a single group, and made a point about their colour. I fail to see how this has any relevance to them being reactionary idiots looking for a fight.

See, I kind of agree with you, but did so without bringing race into my own opinion.

I heartily suggest you start your own pro-caucasian group, and see if what you dread comes to pass. Or perhaps we should just tell the minorties to shut up and just be oppressed?

as in what? direct you to the link? direct myself to hell? what?

Direct in that the evidence presented is not first hand, and he wishes to have said card in his hand and listen to the recording himself, free from any inflection forced upon it.

I used the word 'direct' to indicate that the recording presented was not directly from the card itself. I couldn't, personally, tell what was being said because it all came through a second recording device. It may have been similarly difficult in person, but I don't know that because I haven't heard it.

Why would you even claim that I want you to 'direct yourself to hell'? Why are you necessarily dragging this into incivility?

oh please they are no more oppressed than any other race. It's that same victim mentality. Truth is, if they just stood up for themselves more, and instead of pulling the race card, they could be saying, "hey, thats frakked up, knock it off". I bring race into the debate because that is what the NAACP chooses to use as ammo. Rather than say "these human beings are being mistreated" They have to say it is because they are black. Racism begets racism. One party has to start the change. And if the ignorant white majority is too full of themselves to do so, then maybe the NAACP and the minority organizations could start to do so. But until we all separate the racism from the issue and just call it abuse, harassment, or what have you, it is always going to spiral down to racism and petty quibbling.

The author of this thread knew exactly what kind of reaction he would get when he posted this topic and chose the title he did.

The mods then allowed the thread to stay.

So the author's shock over the reaction is rather ludicrous.

If you don't know ahead of time that a discussion centered around race is going to end up in a heated argument then you are either too young to be on the internet to begin with or you are trolling.

Since the author claims to be a writer, I would think he would know this.

Also interesting to note that a number of people attacked the author's ideas not the author, yet his responses quickly turned to personal attacks calling people "trolls", "liberals", having their "panties in a bunch", etc., etc.

The first sign of a weak argument is how quickly someone's position collapses and they resort to personal attacks instead...

dogma wrote:I used the word 'direct' to indicate that the recording presented was not directly from the card itself. I couldn't, personally, tell what was being said because it all came through a second recording device. It may have been similarly difficult in person, but I don't know that because I haven't heard it.

Why would you even claim that I want you to 'direct yourself to hell'? Why are you necessarily dragging this into incivility?

inhance your calm. I was trying to be funny because I honestly had no idea what you meant by "direct".

IG_urban wrote:oh please they are no more oppressed than any other race. It's that same victim mentality. Truth is, if they just stood up for themselves more, and instead of pulling the race card, they could be saying, "hey, thats frakked up, knock it off".

That's what they are saying. If this is your position, then you are literally annoyed for no reason.

So they should stand up for themselves, except when they are making a stand against potential racist activity yes? You do realise the circular logic to your statement?

And so as long as all minorities are equally abused and discriminated against, everything is just peachy is it?

As for 'not bringing race into it' when defending yourself from discrimination, it's kind of hard to do so when race is the only reason you are being kept down.

Your arguments make absolutely no sense whatsoever fella.

IG_urban wrote:
inhance your calm. I was trying to be funny because I honestly had no idea what you meant by "direct".

I'm quite calm. Nothing in my post could indicate otherwise, unless you assume that I'm being emotional? That would seem indicate that you're projecting your current state onto me.

CT GAMER wrote:The author of this thread knew exactly what kind of reaction he would get when he posted this topic and chose the title he did.

The mods then allowed the thread to stay.

So the author's shock over the reaction is rather ludicrous.

If you don't know ahead of time that a discussion centered around race is going to end up in a heated argument then you are either too young to be on the internet to begin with or you are trolling.

Since the author claims to be a writer, I would think he would know this.

Also interesting to note that a number of people attacked the author's ideas not the author, yet his responses quickly turned to personal attacks calling people "trolls", "liberals", having their "panties in a bunch", etc., etc.

The first sign of a weak argument is how quickly someone's position collapses and they resort to personal attacks instead...

fail, fail, and fail. I was never shocked at people's responses, I was merely defending my position. From the beginning, I was being called a bigot and ignorant, I am just retaliating somewhat more civilized. I think you are too oblivious at your own bland expressions of intelligence trying to call me out as...well whatever your trying to make me out to be. You have a few others have been projecting on to me since the get go, and I am trying to be somewhat neutral, you don't know how many times I have re written my responses to take out as much negativity as possible. I told ONE person to stop trolling, called people out on their liberal statements, and the panty comment is a very popular term for getting riled up more than one needs to be. With the exception of a few people, I am defending my position against quite a few people. One is bound to get a bit riled up, but I truly am trying to be civil.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:oh please they are no more oppressed than any other race. It's that same victim mentality. Truth is, if they just stood up for themselves more, and instead of pulling the race card, they could be saying, "hey, thats frakked up, knock it off".

That's what they are saying. If this is your position, then you are literally annoyed for no reason.

But they are using race as a catalyst when they don't need to, so really, it is NOT what they are saying.

dogma wrote:

IG_urban wrote:
inhance your calm. I was trying to be funny because I honestly had no idea what you meant by "direct".

I'm quite calm. Nothing in my post could indicate otherwise, unless you assume that I'm being emotional? That would seem indicate that you're projecting your current state onto me.

no, enhance your calm is a line from Demolition Man, all I was inferring was that I did not mean anything negative by my "hell" remark.

Dude, their whole problem here is that they felt the card had racist connotations. So I ask again, how exactly does one leave race out of an opinion when race is at the very core of the problem?