Correspondence with Taylor.J.Keitt@Dartmouth.EDU.
Taylor's letter begins the series. In some cases he writes more
than one letter before Birdman responds.
12/7 - 5:12PM
forgive my simplistic question. it's finals week round these here
parts, so i
don't have a lot of brain power to focus on what i'm about to ask
u. God, u
gotta love the internet. who knows what u can stumble over in the
middle of the
night?
so basically, you're arguing that people should be allowed to be
the assholes
they are w/out government intervention? i do agree with
that...the country would
probably be a better place.
oh and another thing, i swear just an innocent question...where'd
u get your
info on the inherent intellectual inferiority of blacks again?
there's truly
nothing like being told that genetically the odds are stacked
against me and my
children from day one...but i guess if it's "true,"
then i better get to dealin
w/it, eh?
and i'm sorry, this is just too funny for me to pass up...
"The civilization of the men who disliked slavery and
torture, and eventually
brought them to an end."
huh? u mean white gentiles? the white gentiles who used blacks to
build this
country in the first place? then only 4o years ago granted blacks
the right to
participate as full citizens? after stacking the deck so hard
against 'em it's
almost comical?
well, i guess it is over, so i don't have much to complain about,
right? God, I
LOVE WHITE PEOPLE! ;-) lol, naw, i'm just kidding.
man, you're still pretty cool, though, and i'm not being
facetious here...i love
people with an opinion. gotta respect that. i sure as hell don't
agree with you
(resisting with all my might my urge as a black man to dismiss
you as a crazy
cracker with nothing better to do...just as u could say thesame
about this crazy
negro here...smarter people should know better than to just be
polarizing),
America needs more like u. at least we'd start to get honest
about where this
country needs to go.
at the very least.
best, buddy
T.
--------
12/7 10:34 PM
I have interleaved my responses with your text and marked them
with *********
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 12/7/02 at 5:12 PM Taylor.J.Keitt@Dartmouth.EDU wrote:
>forgive my simplistic question. it's finals week round these
here parts,
>so i
>don't have a lot of brain power to focus on what i'm about to
ask u. God, u
>gotta love the internet. who knows what u can stumble over in
the middle
>of the
>night?
>
>
>so basically, you're arguing that people should be allowed to
be the
>assholes
>they are w/out government intervention? i do agree with
that...the country
>would
>probably be a better place.
>
>
>oh and another thing, i swear just an innocent
question...where'd u get
>your
>info on the inherent intellectual inferiority of blacks
again? there's
>truly
>nothing like being told that genetically the odds are stacked
against me
>and my
>children from day one...but i guess if it's "true,"
then i better get to
>dealin
>w/it, eh?
******** If you want a book, try Race, by Baker. But there are
many books. Or try The Bell Curve by Herrnstein and Murray. You
have to deal with your IQ problems, just like whites have to deal
with the fact that they are inferior to Jews. But IQ is not the
be-all and end-all (That's Shakespeare -- you do recognize it,
don't you?)
>
>
>and i'm sorry, this is just too funny for me to pass up...
>
>
>"The civilization of the men who disliked slavery and
torture, and
>eventually
>brought them to an end."
>
>
>huh? u mean white gentiles? the white gentiles who used
blacks to build
>this
>country in the first place? then only 4o years ago granted
blacks the
>right to
>participate as full citizens? after stacking the deck so hard
against 'em
>it's
>almost comical?
****** You don't seem to realize that virtually all blacks were
sold into slavery by OTHER BLACKS. Nor do you realize that blacks
STILL PRACTICE SLAVERY IN AFRICA. Nor do you realize that, up
until the 19th century, SLAVERY WAS PRACTICED WIDELY. Nor do you
realize that the word 'slave' comes from the name of the people
who were most frequently enslaved, namely SLAVS who are WHITE. So
have a REAL GOOD LAFF -- at your IGNORANCE.
>
>
>well, i guess it is over, so i don't have much to complain
about, right?
>God, I
>LOVE WHITE PEOPLE! ;-) lol, naw, i'm just kidding.
>
>
>man, you're still pretty cool, though, and i'm not being
facetious
>here...i love
>people with an opinion. gotta respect that. i sure as hell
don't agree
>with you
>(resisting with all my might my urge as a black man to
dismiss you as a
>crazy
>cracker with nothing better to do...just as u could say
thesame about this
>crazy
>negro here...smarter people should know better than to just
be
>polarizing),
>America needs more like u. at least we'd start to get honest
about where
>this
>country needs to go.
>
>
>at the very least.
>
>
>best, buddy
>
>
>T.
***** Wouldn't that be MISTER T?
And thanks for writing. -j
--------
12/7 11:01 PM
--- You wrote:
If you want a book, try Race, by Baker. But there are many books.
Or try The
Bell Curve by Herrnstein and Murray. You have to deal with your
IQ problems,
just like whites have to deal with the fact that they are
inferior to Jews. But
IQ is not the be-all and end-all (That's Shakespeare -- you do
recognize it,
don't you?)
--- end of quote ---
are you really asking me, mr. bryant, or just telling me? ;-)
and yeah, i dug macbeth....but i more like the taming of the
shrew..."to kill
with kindness." which is why we're having this lil
correspondance in the first
place, nay?
and tell me, when u speak of jews, do you speak of the middle
eastern jews, or
the jews of eastern europe moving into western europe and the
like? those are
two different ethicities, and if we're going on ethicity and race
as being the
differentiator between IQ, then how are jews superior to whites
when there are
jews in africa, asia, all over the world, who would fall into the
inferior
categories as outlined by Herrnstein and Murray?
and yeah, how can jews be classfied as a race? seriously, i'm
honestly asking,
i've always wanted to know this anyway.
peace
T.
---------
12/7 11:08 PM
--- You wrote:
****** You don't seem to realize that virtually all blacks were
sold into
slavery by OTHER BLACKS. Nor do you realize that blacks STILL
PRACTICE SLAVERY
IN AFRICA. Nor do you realize that, up until the 19th century,
SLAVERY WAS
PRACTICED WIDELY. Nor do you realize that the word 'slave' comes
from the name
of the people who were most frequently enslaved, namely SLAVS who
are WHITE. So
have a REAL GOOD LAFF -- at your IGNORANCE.
--- end of quote ---
i learned all these things in high school, mr. bryant. duh
while i'm fairly certain the "virtually all" comment is
a stretch, i'm well
aware of the fact that in some of the most brutal wars between
several west
african tribes like the mandika, the prisoners captured would be
either
murdered, tortured, or even indeed sold/traded to the white man,
in exchange for
goods, and protection (i.e. much like the mafia in america: i pay
you not to
kill me). how does that make what happened to blacks in America
any different,
or less brutal? especially when u look at what this country
continuously says it
represents.
not to mention the fact that when slavery was (or is, as you
claim...whatever u
say, man, i honestly had no idea if it is) practiced in africa,
one can rest
assured that these slaves were treated with at least a base line
of respect for
their status as human beings. those goin on the big boat to this
great land
didn't get that same courtesy very often. some of the overseers
in America
didn't get the memo.
and what, because the word slave has an eastern european origin,
i'm supposed to
just say gee, then i guess it has no application to what happened
here in
america, because the word has an intrinsically "white"
meaning, which is
basically what you're suggesting?
oh, come on, man, please. i'm not nearly that stupid. all of the
languages I
SPEAK have european roots. that's the product of growing up in
the western
world, God bless it. that kind of reasoning is so specious i
can't even begin to
find an analogy good enough to say how...incomplete i think it
is. it would make
no sense to think that because the word orignally applied to
europeans, that it
somehow loses context when i discuss the history of American
slavery. it won't
be that easy to absolve that legacy.
besides, in all honesty, i wish i could tell you the meaning of
slave in
swahili, or some bantu (sub-Saharan African) language, if that
would make you
feel better: i'm sure there's an equvilant. i'm also fairly sure
(although it
could only be my idealism talking---granted, these issues
definetely do mean a
lot to me, u know what i mean?) it's not as nasty or negative as
the context it
came to represent in both that section of europe (which is still
war torn and
suffering to this day...), and in the good ol' USA.
this still does not negate the fact, for no other reason than the
color of our
skin, blacks were and are still being treated as second class
citizens, and the
fact of the matter is that many of the problems that still plague
my community
today (the stuff u wrote about in your poetry) are either
stereotypic
generalizations that, even as you say, don't apply to every
single member of a
race, or have some substantial, causal link to the legacy of
diffculty that has
run through the lives of many blacks in this country. of course,
we can beg to
differ on that, but please, man, do me a huge favor:
don't call me ignorant. i didn't call you names (to take it grade
school). i may
be young and idealistic, but save the name calling for blackie
down the street.
i'm a different kind of brotha. i'm honestly trying to have a
discussion with
you. for real.
fair enough?
i am still laughing at how u spelled "laff"
though....funny shit, mr. bryant.
funny shit. ;-)
thanks for writing back too. seriously, this is all very
educational. and i
honestly wish i coudl convey to you how i'm not at all speaking
in a sarcastic
tone when i say that. it's always nice to talk to people who
actually have an
opinion different from yours, opposed to the garbage pantywaste
scardey cats
that u got on these college campuses nowadays. so cheers to you.
sincerely,
T.
(and yeah, that'd be Mr. T to you.)
--------
12/7 11:40 PM
The matter of race is 'As You Like It': The fact is that Jews
have a great deal of similarity in DNA which is not shared by
non-Jews, except possibly Palestinians. You can call it race or
not.
Two more facts for you to ruminate on:
* Free blacks in the pre-Civil War South could own slaves, and --
if I am not mistaken -- a GREATER PERCENTAGE OF FREE BLACKS OWNED
SLAVES THAN DID WHITES.
* American slavery was legally established by a lawsuit brought
by a BLACK. (Yes I have documentation.)
-------
12/8 12:37 AM
My new comments are interleaved and marked with #######
*********** REPLY SEPARATOR ***********
On 12/7/02 at 11:08 PM Taylor.J.Keitt@Dartmouth.EDU wrote:
>--- You wrote:
>
>****** You don't seem to realize that virtually all blacks
were sold into
>slavery by OTHER BLACKS. Nor do you realize that blacks STILL
PRACTICE
>SLAVERY
>IN AFRICA. Nor do you realize that, up until the 19th
century, SLAVERY WAS
>PRACTICED WIDELY. Nor do you realize that the word 'slave'
comes from the
>name
>of the people who were most frequently enslaved, namely SLAVS
who are
>WHITE. So
>have a REAL GOOD LAFF -- at your IGNORANCE.
>
>--- end of quote ---
>
>i learned all these things in high school, mr. bryant. duh
####### Duh? That implies that I should have known you knew them,
but (1) very few know them, particularly blacks and (2) your
letters do not indicate any such knowledge. Duuuuuhhhhh!!!!
>
>
>while i'm fairly certain the "virtually all"
comment is a stretch, i'm well
>aware of the fact that in some of the most brutal wars
between several west
>african tribes like the mandika, the prisoners captured would
be either
>murdered, tortured, or even indeed sold/traded to the white
man, in
>exchange for
>goods, and protection (i.e. much like the mafia in america: i
pay you not
>to
>kill me). how does that make what happened to blacks in
America any
>different,
>or less brutal? especially when u look at what this country
continuously
>says it
>represents.
###### Brutal? That is a liberal canard from the days of Uncle
Tom's Cabin. Owners would have been STUPID to be brutal because
it would have harmed their PROPERTY. Sure, some owners might have
been, but that would be the exception. And how do these facts
make what happened to blacks in America any different? What it
'makes' is that American whites were doing nothig that blacks
were not doing to their own people, which means that there is NO
MORAL OPPROBRIUM IN WHITES' BEHAVIOR WHEN MEASURED BY BLACK
STANDARDS. DUUUUUHHHHH!!!!! As to 'what this country says it
represents', the Constitution was explicitly a constitution for a
WHITE government, where slaves were counted as 2/3 of a person
for census purposes. 'All men are created equal' was no
recognition of black equality; Jefferson, who wrote those words,
EXPLICITLY STATED THAT A GOVERNMENT OF BLACKS AND WHITES TOGETHER
WAS IMPOSSIBLE. And y'know, he seems to have been RIGHT ON, bro.
>
>
>not to mention the fact that when slavery was (or is, as you
>claim...whatever u
>say, man, i honestly had no idea if it is) practiced in
africa, one can
>rest
>assured that these slaves were treated with at least a base
line of
>respect for
>their status as human beings.
####### Very much to the contrary. African slaves are often
sexually abused, while I have never heard of this kind of thing
in America, tho obviously there was at least some (non-abusive)
black-white sexual intercourse.
those goin on the big boat to this great land
>didn't get that same courtesy very often. some of the
overseers in America
>didn't get the memo.
>
>
>and what, because the word slave has an eastern european
origin, i'm
>supposed to
>just say gee, then i guess it has no application to what
happened here in
>america, because the word has an intrinsically
"white" meaning, which is
>basically what you're suggesting?
###### To repeat: The race which has been PRINCIPALLY enslaved
historically has been the slavic race, and this is reflected in
the vocabulary. Your reasoning below seems to be an attempt to
deny this, but the logic -- such as it is -- makes no sense.
>
>
>oh, come on, man, please. i'm not nearly that stupid. all of
the languages
>I
>SPEAK have european roots. that's the product of growing up
in the western
>world, God bless it. that kind of reasoning is so specious i
can't even
>begin to
>find an analogy good enough to say how...incomplete i think
it is. it
>would make
>no sense to think that because the word orignally applied to
europeans,
>that it
>somehow loses context when i discuss the history of American
slavery. it
>won't
>be that easy to absolve that legacy.
>
>
>besides, in all honesty, i wish i could tell you the meaning
of slave in
>swahili, or some bantu (sub-Saharan African) language, if
that would make
>you
>feel better: i'm sure there's an equvilant. i'm also fairly
sure (although
>it
>could only be my idealism talking---granted, these issues
definetely do
>mean a
>lot to me, u know what i mean?) it's not as nasty or negative
as the
>context it
>came to represent in both that section of europe (which is
still war torn
>and
>suffering to this day...), and in the good ol' USA.
>
>
>this still does not negate the fact, for no other reason than
the color of
>our
>skin, blacks were and are still being treated as second class
citizens,
##### To the contrary -- blacks are SPECIALLY PRIVILEGED BY LAW
with affirmative action, set asides, 'hate crime laws' (which are
rarely applied to blacks, even tho, at only 12% of the
population, they STILL COMMIT MORE HATE CRIMES THAN WHITES.) etc
>and the
>fact of the matter is that many of the problems that still
plague my
>community
>today (the stuff u wrote about in your poetry) are either
stereotypic
>generalizations that, even as you say, don't apply to every
single member
>of a
>race,
####### The fact that stereotypes don't apply to every member of
a group don't mean that they aren't generally true, ie, true for
many or most of the members of the group. It is the basic truth
of stereotypes that causes them to survive as beliefs. If they
were false, they would not continue to be believed generation
after generation.
or have some substantial, causal link to the legacy of diffculty
>that has
>run through the lives of many blacks in this country.
###### My point here would be that EVERY IMMIGRANT GROUP HAS
BECOME A SUCCESS WITHIN A GENERATON OR TWO EXCEPT BLACKS, who
can't even make it with SPECIAL PRIVILEGES.
of course, we can
>beg to
>differ on that, but please, man, do me a huge favor:
>
>
>don't call me ignorant.
###### You don't seem to know the difference between name-calling
and descriptions. If I called you a nigger, that would be the
former; but to call you ignorant would not -- rather it would be
something which is either true or false. As an aside, you seem to
be better informed than I would expect for a black, but you got a
long way to go, baby.
i didn't call you names (to take it grade school).
>i may
>be young and idealistic, but save the name calling for
blackie down the
>street.
>i'm a different kind of brotha. i'm honestly trying to have a
discussion
>with
>you. for real.
###### I genuinely appreciate your efforts. I would not bother to
answer you otherwise.
>
>
>fair enough?
>
>
>i am still laughing at how u spelled "laff"
though....funny shit, mr.
>bryant.
>funny shit. ;-)
>
>
>thanks for writing back too. seriously, this is all very
educational. and i
>honestly wish i coudl convey to you how i'm not at all
speaking in a
>sarcastic
>tone when i say that. it's always nice to talk to people who
actually have
>an
>opinion different from yours, opposed to the garbage
pantywaste scardey
>cats
>that u got on these college campuses nowadays. so cheers to
you.
###### The cowardice of my race in confronting racial problems is
truly sickening and I can understand why you would dis whites for
that reason alone.
>
>
>sincerely,
>
>
>T.
>
>(and yeah, that'd be Mr. T to you.)
####### It was only a joke, T. -j
PS: Are you a professor? What's your field? Black studies? Do you
know Prof Tony Martin at Amherst? Many of us in the movement
regard Martin as a 'good guy'.
------------
12/8 12:56 AM
--- You wrote:
###### My point here would be that EVERY IMMIGRANT GROUP HAS
BECOME A SUCCESS
WITHIN A GENERATON OR TWO EXCEPT BLACKS, who can't even make it
with SPECIAL
PRIVILEGES.
--- end of quote ---
hmm...this would make sense, except for the fact that, even when
you take into
account the Irish, Chinese, and Japanese peoples, not to mention
the Native
American, who practically doesn't exist now except in the world
of caricature,
it's not like as soon as the reconstruction era was over blacks
were looked at
with any kind of respect in this country. Irish soon learned the
benefit of
being white, and forgot what it was like to be persecuted, seeing
that we were
the mick of america, just as they were the negro of england. the
chinese and
japenese, after a while were left alone. hell, america even paid
back the
japanese.
but what of jim crow, "seperate but equal" segregation,
and countless other
things done to keep blacks "in their place," the last
of which were only
repealed from american law books only about 40 years ago?
welfare? still more
whites get it in a by the numbers assesment than blacks.
affirmative action is a
joke that would be funny if it wasn't happening for real, as it
is too little,
too late, and definetely in the wrong-ass direction. all it does
is serve to
polarize people further, when it doesn't even give people like
myself, who had
to scrap for every chance i had to prove myself, w/ the fair
shot, because it
automatically gives off the assumption that i got it thru a set
aside. u made
the comment earlier that you wouldn'tve thought i knew about the
slavery in
africa, thing, especially since i was black.
how am i supposed to take that? i'm just as able to participate
in the
meritocracy as you or any other scholar u know. but u'd assume
that because i'm
from the streets i wouldnt' know any better? if other kids, and
that's poor kids
period, not just black and white (remember, young and idealistic
:-p) had the
mother i had, and was blessed with the opportunities i had to do
what i've done,
this disucussion would be moot. but hey, the world is what it is.
i'm betting u won't agree. lol...at least i hope you're
listening.
--------
12/8 12:58 AM
--- You wrote:
###### You don't seem to know the difference between name-calling
and
descriptions. If I called you a nigger, that would be the former;
but to call
you ignorant would not -- rather it would be something which is
either true or
false. As an aside, you seem to be better informed than I would
expect for a
black, but you got a long way to go, baby.
--- end of quote ---
man, you were just ITCHING to say this today, weren't u?
lol...point well taken,
although i can't help but think that, especially by the last
thing you say in
the above statement, there's no reason for me to expect much more
from you than
to think of me as just another nigger.
i think we both have got a long way to go, baby.
--------
12/8 1:01 AM
--- You wrote:
As to 'what this country says it represents', the Constitution
was explicitly a
constitution for a WHITE government, where slaves were counted as
2/3 of a
person for census purposes. 'All men are created equal' was no
recognition of
black equality; Jefferson, who wrote those words, EXPLICITLY
STATED THAT A
GOVERNMENT OF BLACKS AND WHITES TOGETHER WAS IMPOSSIBLE. And
y'know, he seems
to have been RIGHT ON, bro.
--- end of quote ---
i tell ya, u got me on this one, boss, lol...that's all the
gospel truth.
although i hate to break it to ya, but since we're here now, and
all cozied up
in this joint that we did indeed help to build, we're gonna have
to learn to get
along, or else.
i'm willing to if u are.
---------
12/8 1:05 AM
--- You wrote:
PS: Are you a professor? What's your field? Black studies? Do you
know Prof
Tony Martin at Amherst? Many of us in the movement regard Martin
as a 'good
guy'.
--- end of quote ---
actually, i'm just a lowly junior here at the good 'ol D, all of
20 years
old...i'm double majoring in psychology and government, and i've
got hopes,
albeit slim, of someday really affecting some honest dialouge and
change in this
country, apart from the bullshit goin on these days. i've heard
of Martin, but
don't know much about him...i'll look into it.
----------
12/8 1:43 AM
--- You wrote:
####### The fact that stereotypes don't apply to every member of
a group don't
mean that they aren't generally true, ie, true for many or most
of the members
of the group. It is the basic truth of stereotypes that causes
them to survive
as beliefs. If they were false, they would not continue to be
believed
generation after generation.
--- end of quote ---
such is true. however often times the information in stereotypes
can be
incomplete, inaccurate, or generalized. sometimes the stereotype
is in no way
indicative of the majority of indivduals in a group. truth may
be, and is often
present in a stereotype, but not always in the complete, and
accurate manner
needed to make correct judgments about individuals, which is what
is most
important in life. it's definetely easier to believe in and
follow stereotypes.
it's harder to look beneath them and study the core.
remember idealistic 20 year old. also a year of psych 53, person
perception.
---------
12/8 2:48 PM
After the Civil War the blacks were DISCRIMINATED IN FAVOR OF for
about a generation while whites were DISFRANCHISED --
legislatures were FILLED WITH BLACKS -- and 'Jim Crow' began only
after the KKK had managed to STOP ANTIWHITE DISCRIMINAITON.
(That's what the KKK was all about, not about 'lynching
niggers'). A good history of this period is BONDAGE OF THE FREE.
But blacks were STILL 'separate but equal' thruout the period,
and this was confirmed by Plessy vs Ferguson in the late 1800s.
'Jim Crow' did not suppress blacks, as I understand it -- it
merely maintained racial segregation. Having to drink out of a
different water fountain or having to use your own set of
restrooms is not 'suppression' -- hell, those were things I
remember from my own childhood, and blacks and whites got along
just fine -- a lot better than today. The 'worst' that happened
to blacks under Jim Crow was that they were disfranchised -- I
remember my mother's brother telling my father how they used to
kick a black's ass if he tried to vote in TN -- but that didn't
prevent blacks from doing their own thing in their own
communities, and some were very successful. My point is that
blacks have either been FAVORED IN LAW or else have had a
relatively NEUTRAL law for 150 years, yet are the only immigrant
group which is a failure. Even now, with blacks politically
predominant in many large and small cities -- Detroit and DC are
just 2 examples -- they STILL CAN'T MAKE IT. These places are
HELLHOLES. History has shown that WHITES WERE RIGHT TO SUPPRESS
BLACK POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS. When an inferior race rules a
superior one, the result is DISASTER FOR EVERYONE. If blacks have
been thought of as 'niggers' for all this time, that is because
they have behaved that way. Jews were 'kikes', Chinese were
'chinks', Irish were 'micks', whites were 'honkies', etc, but
virtually nobody uses these phrases any more because these groups
have EARNED RESPECT. Blacks have NOT, and that's why blacks get
their backs up about 'nigger' -- THEY KNOW THE DISSING IS
DESERVED. Present company excepted, along with a number of your
very excellent brothers such as Walter Williams (whom I have
corresponded with), Thomas Sowell and some others.
PS: Percentage wise, a lot more blacks get welfare than whites.
And affirmative action, etc, is no joke -- dozens of horror
stories of antiwhite discrimination pass over my electronic desk
every month. Ever hear of Bakke? Hopwell? If you want a list of
court cases, write the Center for Individual Rights, whose former
Executive Director, Michael S Greve, is a friend of mine (he
blurbed my book on Law & Justice).
Will that be enuf for Christmas, uh, Kwanzaa?
----------
12/8 3:26 PM
--- You wrote:
My point is that blacks have either been FAVORED IN LAW or else
have had a
relatively NEUTRAL law for 150 years, yet are the only immigrant
group which is
a failure. Even now, with blacks politically predominant in many
large and
small cities -- Detroit and DC are just 2 examples -- they STILL
CAN'T MAKE IT.
These places are HELLHOLES. History has shown that WHITES WERE
RIGHT TO
SUPPRESS BLACK POLITICAL ASPIRATIONS. When an inferior race rules
a superior
one, the result is DISASTER FOR EVERYONE. If blacks have been
thought of as
'niggers' for all this time, that is because they have behaved
that way. Jews
were 'kikes', Chinese were 'chinks', Irish were 'micks', whites
were 'honkies',
etc, but virtually nobody uses these phrases any more because
these groups have
EARNED RESPECT. Blacks have NOT, and that's why blacks get their
backs up about
'nigger' -- THEY KNOW THE DISSING IS DESERVED. Present company
excepted, along
with a number of your very excellent brothers such as Walter
Williams (whom I
have corresponded with), Thomas Sowell and some others.
--- end of quote ---
here's more of that random reasoning again. most of the american
blacks which
you are talking about did not immigrate of their own free will to
this country,
at least not in the manner that the other groups which you speak
of did. what is
past is past, but it does not make it irrelevant.
besides, as a matter of fact most african peoples who have
emigrated to america
of their own free will have become very sucessful, operating
small businesses
and the like much in the same fashion that other recent first and
second
generation immigrants, like the much vilified koreans, have. this
is proven by
the amounts of african vendors in my old neborhood of west
philadelphia alone.
i noticed that in your list of cities that are politically
dominated by blacks u
left out the likes of atlanta, san franciso, and the
like...atlanta has one of
the highest standards of living for blacks in the country. the
problems in
detroit and DC are due to the sheer political idiocy of the
people who are in
charge, this is no doubt true...but it has little to do w/race
when compared
with those other examples.
which brings me to your jaunt around the racial slur world at the
end
here...rest assured, mr bryant, even in my youth i have seen that
in this
country there still exists a bevy of individuals who still think
of the
aforementioned groups that way, use these slurs on a daily basis,
and have very
little respect for them. more than anything else, what i have
observed about the
proclivity of certain individuals to be disparaging to groups in
this country
leads me to believe that most people who do so are convinced they
know
everything there is to know about the world at large. i've found
out the hard
way that this is rarely the case.
i just read some interesting columns by sowell for a a paper i'm
writing in my
Govt 60.1 class. thanks for the heads up.
---------
12/8 3:27 PM
--- You wrote:
Will that be enuf for Christmas, uh, Kwanzaa?
--- end of quote ---
i'll get back to you. there are 8 days of gift giving all told,
after all.
* * * Back to the Home Page of John "Birdman" Bryant, the World's Most Controversial Author * * *