|
UPSG -> RE: When you're a feminist in this lifestyle...(a rant more than anything) (2/7/2009 9:34:55 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lockit
quote:
ORIGINAL: UPSG
quote:
ORIGINAL: Lockit
In a world of wrongs... because it is wrong... does that mean we have no personal accountablity and can blame the world for being angry, wounded, self focused and just all round pissy becasue the world doesn't work the way we want it to and find justification for victimization and feelings of revenge ten-fold? Great excuses aren't reasons to give up personal accountablity or honor. If you have a problem with most the world... prove they are wrong by being a better person and just say fuck'um... move on and have a great life. A pity party and excusing/blaming everyone but yourself will get you no where of worth.
Worked for the 1/3 of colonists (terrorists against the British crown) that fought in the American Revolutionary War and those that gave birth to the Declaration of Independence.
Worked for pissed off ex-confederate soldiers that turned bank robbers and horse thieves.
I know very well that you will attempt to give me a history lesson from your previous, educated post, but you know... I dare say you cannot compare the two. THEY cared about a majority being currently treated badly, not one pissed off girl who is pissed off over some things that happenend long ago... and that she looks young and who wants to seek revenge, not the righting of wrongs. History is one thing, personal choice to be mad at the world another. You cannot argue or mix up the two and if one chooses to be upset, rather than happy... good for them... you can see here how well that works. I see no cause that benefits man and country. I only see a young person, pissed off and with charatoristic's that will not change the world or even her world in a good way.
Now... this young woman speaks of revenge upon people and isn't happy in her life...I dare say she isn't having decent and healthy relationships... which would be something one could not say about the relationships these people in history could not be accused of. Many had wonderful relationships from the studies I have done, including my own family... who brought about the discrimination and hardships of many... but who also did a lot of right and had wonderful relationships... according to family history and some history books.
You compare things that cannot be compared. So save your history lesson for me... I won't read it.
I wasn't attacking you, I was simply pointing out some significant social facts that were not only historical but that have consequently effected generations of Americans. I the case of the ex-confederate soldier become outlaw, he has survived as a romantic cowboy tale to this day.
Generally - and this is not just the U.S. but all over the world - those that fit into dominant group tend to encourage the disenfranchised to either accept their position in life or to forgive. The powerful never forgive however e.g. U.S. response to 9/11.
The 1/3 of colonial terrorist that treasonably fought against her lawful British crown, were not fighting for the majority being treated badly. They were largely fighting for a merchant class in the colonies and not poor Whites who sold their labor (wage earners). Supposedly, 1/3 of the Whites colonists were pro-British crown and the other 1/3 were neutral. Essentially a minority fought for a minorities benefits. The merchant class did not want their financial state - their abilities for ever increasing profits - to be dictated by British policy that, needless to say, was unfavorable to both the merchant colonial class and the overall economic growth within the colonies.
What does this have to do with any thing? Well, while colllege is fine (though it is an overpriced industry today in the U.S. that at times actually stifles critical and probing thought), in my opinion, and this is just my opinion, what is greater or more beneficial is to develop a life of reading. If the OP's erudition was greater (and we have something wonderful in this country called the free public library system) she would probably be able to better come grip with her emotional feelings for revenge on males and Whites. How so? In my opinon she would number one, come to discover that many of the powerful in Black-African tribes and empires were complicit in the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade and few within Black-Africa tried to end the industry of the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade (Where was there a comparable William Wilberforce in Black Africa?). Number two, she over time would come to learn more and more about the roots of power.
Let me make a few points for food for thought.
1. Margaret Sanger (I may have spelled her name wrong) was both a feminist and a racist. She understood like all people that understand the historical roots of power across the world, that all powerful nations or empires relied upon large numbers of people (it is not coincedental that the United States is the third largest populated nation on earth)
2. War requires an industrial base too and not just people - at least wars of expansion. States and cities can be viewed as micro states, and given that, metropoliatan Milwaukee with roughly a million people and a stronger industrial base than Alaska, would likely win in a war against the entire state of Alaska.
3. The police force (a job that was once done by militay troops e.g. ancient Rome in Palestine, and still that is done in some nations today e.g. Brazil, Italy etc.) is a paramilitary organization outfited with military grade weaponry including light-armored vehicals. The rank structure in the police force is even that of a military.
4. The Black-American population is anywhere between 12% to 14% of the U.S. populatiuon. We can surmise from that that the male population in Black-America is roughly half the sum of Black-America.
5. Latinos now make up a larger percentage of the U.S. population than Blacks, indeed with Asians and Amerindians (many Amerindians in the U.S. are mixed-race with White phenotype) combined that difference is even greater.
6. Black-America does not have enough control over industry (not with $ but with capital such as factory buildings, machinery, etc.) nor does it have enough people to ever wage war against White-America and then enslave its people (White-Americans). And as I've pointed out earlier in this thread, Jews, Italians, Irish, Polish and so forth were not considered White at onetime, but eventually were allowed mebership into the dominant racial group (White). As I've noted, this will likely occur with certain non-White groups today, in the future, such as the Hapa.
7. If White-Americans today, as a general whole, were so bad, they would simply exterminate Black-Americans (and they out of all Americans have the potential capacity to do so). But they don't, because simply speaking, most White people simply are not that bad. Indeed, some of them treat Black people better than Black people treat Black people.
8. Given the significant socio-political changes in the U.S. since the 17th century, I think it would be counterproductive (and evil arguably) for Black-America to wage guerrilla warfare (the only sane warfare they could wage) against White-America. The U.S. economy would be destroyed and consequently the quality of life for Black-Americans would plummet.
9. Has there ever been a time to fight? Yeah, I think so. I think Irish under Anglo rule with their Anglo-Norman landlords had a perfectly good reason to fight. I think the Palesitians have a perfectly good reason to fight today. I think the Black Panthers and the N.O.I. (Nation of Islam) had a very good reason and strategy to threaten martial warfare against White-America in the 1960's and 70's. Today the racial dominant class like to cast Huey Newton and Malcom X in a lesser role than Martin Luther King Jr not because it benefits Black folks but because it benefits White folks. In fact the Black Panthers are projected as a rather former evil thing, even though they were a quintessential American story of picking up arms against oppression.
10. What the OP searches for, but perhaps does not yet know it, is the history of socialism in the United States. Socialists were by-and-large against sexism, racism, and very much in defense of the wage earner (wage slave).
All that said, I would like to point out a fact little disputed by sociologist and psycholgists today (though it is disputed in essence by popular media propaganda that says we can be whatever we want and are soley self-made). We all - human beings - are a product of the history of our antecendants. This is why Black-Americans play basketball and not soccer like Black-Brazilians, this is why Black-Americans speak English and not Portuguese like Black-Brazilians. In fact the history of oppression is ever with many Black-Americans in their surnames - which most often happen to be Anglo-Saxon, Scottish, or Welsh. Black-Americans don't have German, Polish, Jewish, or Italian surnames for a reason. They also don't have surnames that would be representative of the Fulani or Wolof for a reason.
|
|
|
|
