Supporting Black Leaders.

Why did you title this, Supporting Black leaders? Condi Rice and Collin Powell are not Black leaders, they may be leading Blacks but they are not Black leaders. MLK was definetly a leader of the people and any critical analysis of his life is not an attempt to destroy him or his reputation. On ther other hand Condi and Collin have served the goals of the imperialist just fine and do not have any redeming qualities as it relate to helping Black folk in the way MLK did, thus mentioning MLK in the same sentence as these two clowns is to do to MLK what you are claiming others are doing to him when they speak about his womanizing.

As far as the hiphop artist, those who get defensive in regards to them, probably could not tell you much about Western imperialism and the fall out from it, so in their eyes these rap stars are bigger than life but none of those people post on this forum.

As far as the hiphop artist, those who get defensive in regards to them, probably could not tell you much about Western imperialism and the fall out from it, so in their eyes these rap stars are bigger than life {but none of those people post on this forum}

whew... I almost ignored the disclaimer

quote:

Why did you title this, Supporting Black leaders? Condi Rice and Collin Powell are not Black leaders, they may be leading Blacks but they are not Black leaders.

I titled this discussion, "Supporting Black Leaders" not because I think Condi and Colin are black leaders--my reason for using the title is simply because it's catches the eye. I hate taking the time to come up with a title for a discussion only to have the format of websiste I'm posting to cut it off.

"Supporting Leading Black People" would have been a much better title but I would have had to cut my eyeballs out to see, "Supporting Leadin....."

I agree with you, Faheem, neither Condi nor Colin are 'leaders' in an afrocultural sense, however, you can't overlook Colin's military career, no matter how much of a 'house nigger,' as Harry Belafonte so shrewdly put it, Colin is percieved to be.

Which reminds me (pausing to insert like my mentor, Dr. Dyson, hee hee), Michael Dyson did point out that Belafonte was bold in the purpose of attacking Powell but, Belafonte, can hardly say anything. The once civil rights activist, himself, Harry Belafonte, divorced his first wife, a physician, for a white woman. Now, if that isn't inordinately considered being a 'house nigger,' then, I don't know what the hell is.

The point is, Colin and Condi are in very precarious positions. I wonder how you would handle being appointed to such a position as Colin and Condi? I'm sure they both went into those positions fully aware of how they would be percieved by black America, nevertheless, they did so. Whatever their personal reasons were for making the career advancements they made, they are still black pioneers.

There was a time when Booker T. Washington was considered a sellout, by the peers of his era, for his visionary ways but he was a pioneer nonetheless. It's in times like these that we need positive black role models--look up to them not necessarily for the decisions they've made in the current positions they hold but their struggle to get to the point were they would be eligible for those positions.

I question Condi's and Colin's poor decisions, particularly colin, for the mistakes he made while under Reagan but that's another story, and we all know Condi's track record, nevertheless, I still look up to them for the accomplishments they have made.

Speaking of Western Imperialism, as you probably already know, it was interesting to find out, a few years ago, that, indeed, the first slave owners or, if you want to get technical, endentured slave owners, as well as the first land owners were black.

As a matter of fact, blacks were begining to own endentured slaves and aquire land and a rate much greater than our Imperialist counterparts, which is why they devised a means to circumvent endentured slavery, rob the first black owners of their land and holdings and begin what is known as slavery--I'm rambling but I'm sure you are aware of this little piece of historical trivia.

quote:

Originally posted by IRONHORSE:

The point is, Colin and Condi are in very precarious positions.

On that, to some extent, we may possibly agree. But that doesn't say a whole lot for the rest of your point...

quote:

I wonder how you would handle being appointed to such a position as Colin and Condi? I'm sure they both went into those positions fully aware of how they would be percieved by black America, nevertheless, they did so. Whatever their personal reasons were for making the career advancements they made, they are still black pioneers.

They have earned the perceptions people have of them. PERIOD!

Sure there are many expectations. Perhaps even a lot of unrealistic expectations. Nevertheless, ultimately the way they are perceived has everything to do with the stances they have made especially in situations when they could have been way more resolute if they are at all to be respected for any other than just having Black skin.

In fact, they would be Role Models, or Pioneers as you say, worthy of great consideration/appreciation if their stances were grounded firmly within the midst of the Black Political Consensus.

quote:

There was a time when Booker T. Washington was considered a sellout, by the peers of his era, for his visionary ways but he was a pioneer nonetheless.

And neither Condi nor Colin can hold Booker T's jock. If only the Condi's and Colin's of the world could produce half the results, however problematic in terms of the overall socio-political dynamics, then we could actually have something tangible by which to actually respect them... you know, other than their skin color and individual achievements.

Black skin regardless to power or prestige held by an individual (who is "Black") is no automatic grant for "support". If we are going to support someone we will support them for what they can do with the positions they hold other than the fact they hold them.

We can appreciate and acknowledge their accomplishments but our support for them, for those of us who are focused on SUBSTANCE -- i.e. things tangible and productive to our collective cause -- stops at the point to where they choose to not avail themselves towards those ends.

Support is like respect. It is earned. Black skin even with "accomplishments" is no automatic pass for that.

quote:

Speaking of Western Imperialism, as you probably already know, it was interesting to find out, a few years ago, that, indeed, the first slave owners or, if you want to get technical, endentured slave owners, as well as the first land owners were black.

Produce your evidence of this Black First...

quote:

It's in times like these that we need positive black role models--look up to them not necessarily for the decisions they've made in the current positions they hold but their struggle to get to the point were they would be eligible for those positions.

This is an unprincipled, VALUE-less position. There are accomplished African-Americans who take a stand and let the chips fall where they may. They are worthy of respect and support.

Again, we can and do appreciate Condi's and Colin's achievements and the extent to which they are "pioneers" (something debatable in terms of overall meaning and import) but none of that is reason to divorce ourselves from reality and our critical faculties just to make sure they or people who esteem them feel like we give them enough credit.

Credit for what I don't know. To use the word Leader/Leading... (any way you want)... requires us to assess where they are leading and exact what are they a leader of.

Faheem was right. You should never put MLK in the same breath or sentence. And I say the same for Booker T. As for MLK, he said: IT WAS THE PEOPLE WHO MOVED THE LEADERS.

Any ideas with an intent, conscious or not, of reversing that natural order is automatically suspect. (Hee Hee) When leaders are not in harmony with those they are suppose to represent or lead then, by definition, they are not leaders in the true sense of the word. Definitely not in the MLK sense and, perhaps, hardly even close to Booker T. either.

Booker T's program, for one, wasn't based on WHITE/Western "individualism".

Wow, Nmaginate, I didn't know you weren't aware of this 'black first.' Damn, now I'm going to have to look through all of my damn graduate notes just to find the name of the black man and black woman that owned the first endentured slaves, as well as find the copy of the journal my african american studies professor copied for us to study during the course of the work--for now, you're just going to have to take my word for it.

By the way, before you go on about not believing everything you read, I don't completely subscribe to that philosophy--it's what has many black people in the predicament they're in now--complacent, uneducated, unemployed, and non-viable.

As for the rest of your response, though I respect your views and opinions, comparing the pioneers of yesteryear to the pioneers of today is plain preposterous. Just because I braught up someone's name from the past doesn't mean I'm comparing them to people of today, and it would be foolish to do so.

Changing times, politics, culture and society will never allow any more MLK's, Malcolm X's, Thurgood Marshalls, Booker T. Washingtons, George Washington Carvers, or any of the like, nevertheless, we have to make due with what we have--uplift those that we do have and encourage the ones that are up and coming. If we judged our leading blacks by their shortcomings and mistakes, MANY of our nations leading black people wouldn't have a leg to stand on, so I don't share your same perspective--MANY of our contemporary leaders cannot hold a candle to their predecessors.

quote:

There are accomplished African-Americans who take a stand and let the chips fall where they may. They are worthy of respect and support.

Does that mean that because an accomplished african american doesn't perform to a certain afrocultural standard they are worthless to us as black people? Man, understand I'm not disagreeing with you in regards to Condi and Colin but they are there nontheless. You want to beat up on somebody, beat up on the brother in Georgia that broke free from the balif, shot and killed two deputies and killed a retired CIA operative--beat up on the sister that ran over a man that had a wife and two children because she was high on crack but have at least some compassion for people like Condi and Colin--okay, you can shit all over Clarence Thomas or Al Sharpton, HA HA HA HA.... but I have at least a little respect for the former.

quote:

Originally posted by IRONHORSE:

...for now, you're just going to have to take my word for it.

For now, I take your mentioning of such curious things, fact or not, as just that - curious...

quote:

By the way, before you go on about not believing everything you read...

BTW, my comments weren't directed towards what you subscribe to, in whole or in part per se. I responded to what you wrote. You should do likewise without the ridiculous assumption about what I may be ready to "go on about not believing".

quote:

Just because I braught up someone's name from the past doesn't mean I'm comparing them to people of today, and it would be foolish to do so.

Yet and still you did bring them up in the same sentence. Your exact words implying a comparison was:

What I find to be disturbing is how black people can collectively criticize and dis-own people like Condolezza Rice, Colin Powell and Martin Luther King.

In no wise is MLK collectively "disowned" in any respect like either Condi or Colin. Arguably, a majority of Blacks "disown" Condi and Colin. The majority of Black people embrace, cherish and claim MLK and esteem him in the highest and he gets respect even from those critical of him, his politics, etc.

So you careless statement is problematic even without any mention of a comparison. It was WRONG by definition in terms of what you tried to assert about MLK.

And this issue with Collective Criticism seems to be steeped in a less than flattering "predicament".

quote:

...so I don't share your same perspective--MANY of our contemporary leaders cannot hold a candle to their predecessors.

And you never will "share" my perspective when you misrepresent it. You brought up our forebearers by way of comparing them to those amongst us today. That's undeniable.

You mention Booker T specifically to mention how he was considered by some to be a "sell-out". And your reason for doing that? Was it not to draw a comparison or to suggest how, since you labeled Booker T as a "visionary", these contemporary "pioneers" may also be "visionaries" in their own time?

See... the only one lost on what time and context we're talking about is you. That is, you conveniently hope you can act like somehow there is some confusion on that. Again, I addressed what you said. It's obvious you're unprepared to support your position seeing as how you haven't dealt with the crux of what I said.

First I said:
If only the Condi's and Colin's of the world could produce half the results, however problematic in terms of the overall socio-political dynamics, then we could actually have something tangible by which to actually respect them... you know, other than their skin color and individual achievements.

Hmmm... Seems as if I wasn't concerned about either Colin or Condi measuring up to Booker T, etc. I said if they would PRODUCE half as much in terms of results, by whatever measure that translate to in our life and times... THEN... then we would have reason to support them.

Then I said:
Black skin regardless to power or prestige held by an individual (who is "Black") is no automatic grant for "support". If we are going to support someone we will support them for what they can do with the positions they hold other than the fact they hold them.

quote:

Does that mean that because an accomplished african american doesn't perform to a certain afrocultural standard they are worthless to us as black people?

C'mon DEBRA 'The Unprepared'...

The criteria I've set is one based upon RESULTS. I've acknowledged BOTH MLK and Booker T. because of results not ideology. Philosophically, ideologically neither of them fall squarely within the mine.

But if just being "Black" and having a position -- rising to one, appointed or otherwise -- is your measure of a "standard" then, of course, me daring to think of predicating who and what we call "Leading" or "Leadership" on RESULTS and being RESPONSIVE to those to be "lead" is really a very arbitrary standard. I can see that... lol

quote:

Man, understand I'm not disagreeing with you in regards to Condi and Colin but they are there nontheless.

WTF is that?? "They are there nonetheless"...

What? They get some automatic BLACK SKIN PRIVILEGE or something?

What are you talking about?

quote:

...at least some compassion for people like Condi and Colin... I have at least a little respect for the former.

Respect based on what?

Where have I been disrespectful?
Where have I "beat up" on Condi or Colin?

Again, I've only responded to your poorly presented ideas here. Further, I have not suggested Condi or Colin are "worthless". I've taken issue with your mindless thesis. PERIOD.

I've said we can and do appreciate and acknowledge their accomplishments. But when it comes to talking about who are our Leaders or Leading figures, those whom we exhalt as Role Models in that CONTEXT (its your title by whatever spin you want to put on the word LEAD) then there is a very demanding standard and just being Black and in a position doesn't fit that bill. PERIOD.

Again, this is about RESULTS and production and leaders/leading figures being RESPONSIVE. It is upon that and those figures willingness to take a stand and stand with their people, the Political Consensus and/or what's demonstrably in the best interest of their people that respect is given.

There is no Respect Pass given unconditionally to someone just because they are BLACK. So, its up to you to demonstrate what Condi and Colin have done as BLACK Leaders or Leading Blacks (and actually demonstrate what they are "leading" us in) to get the respect you think they deserve.

Again, the respect they get is the respect they've earned. You're trying to overstate their "worth" and value. Maybe you're enchanted by Black First without Black Focus or Black Collective Forward Movement. But the day of looking at Black First as if they represent some great accomplishments, symbolic of more than what the achievement actually amounts to, is over just like the foregone eras our predecessors.

Change with the times, brother... Instead talking in the sense of Black First by individuals, as Leonard Pitts Jr. would say, let's talk about Black LAST... and I say that with respect to collective things.

Change with the times, brother...

As for who to beat up on... NO ONE, I MEAN NO ONE is beyond reproach. And as the saying goes: To Whom Much Is Given Much Is Expected.

Again, you seem to want to reverse the way things should be out of some regard for Debra-esque "SAFE SPACE" politics.

Let's see you take the Michael Dyson CHALLENGE:
Name Five Things The Black Middle Class or Ruling Elite Need To Get Straight and how they(us) must be SELF-CRITICAL.

Why you want somebody else to be "beat up on"?
I don't see anyone here promoting the brother from the court scenario as being someone to esteem on false pretenses. I don't see a shortage of criticisms when it comes to brothers like that either.

So let's be real...

Is it really a struggle if Massa has designated you a "Chosen One" and you accept the position? Shuckin and jivin seems to be the quickest, most pain-free way of getting to "the top" in America.

This article speaks to Blacks being the largest slave owners and offers statistics. A Debate Professor told me once "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." Those joints frequently read whatever you want them to. I haven't had a chance to read it in depth, but one look at the bibliography gives me pause. If you specifically set out to prove that Blacks were the largest and first slave owners and only look at sources that agree with you, you can hardly call your findings objective.

Frenchy, the thing to me more than anything, beside the typical "take my word for it" BS... is exactly how any of that is relevant here.

IMO, anyone willing to assert something they almost specifically express as something "interesting" or something unknown or somehow contrary to what is believed or contrary to what has been mention (Western Imperialism)... who isn't just as quick and willing to produce the supporting information that not only establishes what they've suggested but actually qualifies it and put it in an actual context... someone like that is by definition suspect.

As Faheem suggested, we don't get down like that here. IRONHORSE, of course, has an opportunity to come forth with his information and after that, you know, like actually show how his "ramble" is relevant to the topic. But, it goes without saying, there have been so many who have traveled that route before but never show up when it comes time to substantiate what they say or when pushed they produce 'questionable' sources.

So, of course, IRONHORSE would be quick to say "take my word for it" as if he's established some credibility. Oh but he thinks respect and credibility should be given out on GP...

My bad... lol

quote:

Originally posted by Frenchy:
Is it really a struggle if Massa has designated you a "Chosen One" and you accept the position? Shuckin and jivin seems to be the quickest, most pain-free way of getting to "the top" in America.

This article speaks to Blacks being the largest slave owners and offers statistics. A Debate Professor told me once "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." Those joints frequently read whatever you want them to. I haven't had a chance to read it in depth, but one look at the bibliography gives me pause. If you specifically set out to prove that Blacks were the largest and first slave owners and only look at sources that agree with you, you can hardly call your findings objective.

....and the fact that Black people did in fact own slaves, both in the U.S., and in Africa, will make it exceedingly impossible to hold Corporate Caucasian America responsible for the entire payment of reparations for the atrocities of slavery.

....Heck, considering the reality that some of the Black middle-class in foster care providers, social workers, probation officers, and/or other members of the Black community have contributed to the illegal break up of law abiding Black families for profit in contemporary times, would lead anyone of rational mind to believe, that what is true today, was also true back in the day, in that some Black people continue to sell each other out for a few shiny trinkets of silver.

Can't convince me, that the enslavement of Black people by Black people within the U.S., and in Africa, did not exist, considering the reality of what goes on in contemporary times.

Heck, the illegal and unwarranted break-up of the traditional Black family structure for profit was supposed to have ended with the abolishment of slavery, and here you have our own elected leadership, foster care providers, social workers, probation officers, and/or other individuals from within our own community promoting this treasonous activity!

Sincerely,

Michael Lofton

quote:

Originally posted by Michael:

quote:

Originally posted by Frenchy:
Is it really a struggle if Massa has designated you a "Chosen One" and you accept the position? Shuckin and jivin seems to be the quickest, most pain-free way of getting to "the top" in America.

This article speaks to Blacks being the largest slave owners and offers statistics. A Debate Professor told me once "There are lies, damn lies, and statistics." Those joints frequently read whatever you want them to. I haven't had a chance to read it in depth, but one look at the bibliography gives me pause. If you specifically set out to prove that Blacks were the largest and first slave owners and only look at sources that agree with you, you can hardly call your findings objective.

....and the fact that Black people did in fact own slaves, both in the U.S., and in Africa, will make it exceedingly impossible to hold Corporate Caucasian America responsible for the entire payment of reparations for the atrocities of slavery.

....Heck, considering the reality that some of the Black middle-class in foster care providers, social workers, probation officers, and/or other members of the Black community have contributed to the illegal break up of law abiding Black families for profit in contemporary times, would lead anyone of rational mind to believe, that what is true today, was also true back in the day, in that some Black people continue to sell each other out for a few shiny trinkets of silver.

Can't convince me, that the enslavement of Black people by Black people within the U.S., and in Africa, did not exist, considering the reality of what goes on in contemporary times.

Heck, the illegal and unwarranted break-up of the traditional Black family structure for profit was supposed to have ended with the abolishment of slavery, and here you have our own elected leadership, foster care providers, social workers, probation officers, and/or other individuals from within our own community promoting this treasonous activity!

Sincerely,

Michael Lofton

Michael, black slaveowners didn't make laws saying that blacks were the lowest of the low and should be held, by law of man and God, in continual, generational lifetime bondage. How can you own someone that's inferior by law, if you're also considered inferior? Plus, white slaveowners were able to enslave that black slaveowner and commandeer his servants.

Nmaginate, the only bullshit I see in this forum is the dump truck full of it in your obnoxious, snobbish, conceited, big-headed, obtuse responses.

Who the hell are you and who died and left you lectern of the universe? YOU AIN'T NOBODY! You want proof of the fact that a black man was one of the first endentured slave owners, that not only owned blacks, but owned white endentured slaves--as a means to pay for their passage from England to America--I would have taken the time to copy and paste the proof but since you want to be an asshole about it, find it your damn self--take a chill pill and sit down. This catty, bitchy, malicious, malignent way you've interacted is unecessary, uncalled for, and a blatant display of your obvious inferiority complex you regretably possess.

You want to get real--let's get real then. Fuck what you think the black middle class needs to do--lets take a more accountable approach. What have YOU done to getting things straight? What have YOU done in being self-critical? What have YOU done in order to be a part of the solution instead of being part of the problem in empowering and uplifting [us] black people?

Let me just tell you what I've done--I've foregown my original flourishing career as a contracting graphic designer to become an educater in various inner city public schools in two different states--becoming an influential force in black children's lives while educating them in the process.

I've volunteered hundreds of hours to helping various fledgling afrocentric, for non-profit organisations stay alive, I've mentored at-risk children from ages 5-18 on every social issue that is facing them, I've mentored college students, from freshmen to seniors, in various HBCU's on social etiquette, financial responsibility and empowerment, interpersonal relationships, safe sex, networking, interviewing skills, preparing for life after college...the list of selfless acts accomplishments goes on, and all of these things were done, free of charge, on my personal time.

Nmaginate, can you attest to having touched young black minds--be approached by black youth that you have influenced and have them to say thank you for making a difference in their lives? Can you attest to influencing young black youth to not only attend college but persue a degree in the same profession as yourself?

You see, I could have been like many of the typical black middle to upper middle class society--achieve success, move forward and close the door of opportunity behind me and never look back but I didn't--I chose to give back to the community in as many ways as humanly possible.

And as for you, Frenchy:

quote:

Is it really a struggle if Massa has designated you a "Chosen One" and you accept the position? Shuckin and jivin seems to be the quickest, most pain-free way of getting to "the top" in America.

When it comes to the political arena, everyone, including blacks has had to "shuck and jive" their way to the top. Thurgood Marshall, the man that can quite arguably be considered single-handedly abolishing Jim Crow laws, shucked and jived his way to the top--he was a grand ass-licker as he pawned, hob nobbed, and conned his way around crucial white lawyers, judges, politicians and even the president of United States in the act of having McArthur removed from power in order that the army be de-segregated. Oh, and if you want proof, Nmaginate, go march your self-righteous ass over to a bookstore and pick up Thurgood Marshall's autobiography.

You want to show me how you do things in AfricanAmerica.org? Fuck that--some of you self-righteous negroes, suffering from dellusions of grandeur, need a reality check--thinking that someone has to have achieved a certain acceptable degree of blackness for you to deem them worthy of acceptance and support. It's that back-biting, crab-hearted mentality that is holding us back as a people today while other races of people are passing us by.

quote:

Again, this is about RESULTS and production and leaders/leading figures being RESPONSIVE. It is upon that and those figures willingness to take a stand and stand with their people, the Political Consensus and/or what's demonstrably in the best interest of their people that respect is given.

Colin, Clarence, and Condi have one thing in commom. They have strayed away from the uniqueness of our political consensus and struggle. They have replaced this inherent uniqueness with the White agenda in spite of the Black agenda. They promote self-hate and a strict adherence to political dress-up advocating imperialist views and white supremacist beliefs.

This is particularily sickening because they are extremely intelligent individuals. This supports the view that white intelligence is the right intelligence. Black thought is oppressed by our own, that's why they are such disappointments.

quote:

some of you self-righteous negroes, suffering from dellusions of grandeur, need a reality check--thinking that someone has to have achieved a certain acceptable degree of blackness for you to deem them worthy of acceptance and support.

Umm... Thanks for commenting with your ill-conceived, pre-conceived notions.

The thing I expected from you is to simply support what you said and show how it was relevant to the topic (i.e. your mention of Black as first slave owners, etc.). Instead of doing that, you went off on the deep end. But if asking, expecting, requiring you to support something you said is "back-biting" then okay! I'm guilty.

Yes, it's my Delusion Of Grandeur.

quote:

Oh, and if you want proof, Nmaginate...

All of that over a simple request to support your statement and stipulate to its relevance. This is too damn funny.

IRONHORSE, I didn't ask you about Thurgood Marshall... Nor have I stipulated that you have to some "Degree Of Blackness" you must past or acquire. It's really not that hard, IRONHORSE... What happened to:

Wow, Nmaginate, I didn't know you weren't aware of this 'black first.'

Instead of "wow-ing" me with information to support what you said, again, you chose to go off the deep...

Nmaginate, first of all, stop side-stepping the fact that you resorted to acting niggerish, yeah, I said it, NIGGERISH, instead of interacting with me, from the get go, in an objective, open-minded, intellectual manner.

Secondly, you haven't answered the challenge you gave me--what have YOU done to make a change in black society?

First of all, Nmaginate, your post from 09:56 last night was amazing. You usually do get pretty surgical in breaking things down, but this one really brought it. (I'm sure it helps that, for once, I agree with it 100%, but still... )

Second, Frenchy, how much do you want to bet that almost all of these free "blacks" who owned slaves were, on average, 99.99% white anyway? Remember, the one drop rule wasn't a state of mind back then; it was law. And just so you know, the same thing goes for when these racist revisionsists argue that there were "white" slaves; they may have been visually white, but most of these people had a black ancestor, and that's why they were slaves. So these people were "exceptions that prove the rule," which means that it's pointless for anyone to try and use their examples for the purpose of attempting to de-racialize enslavement.

Finally, Ironhorse... I don't know where you get the idea that you can make what you claim are factual statements, and then refuse a simple request for some information in support of it. All of these other directions you're trying to go off in do nothing to move anybody to accept what you say about the first slaveowners, or anything else. The way you would win is by hitting us with a link that credibly supports your assertion. One hint as to a possible reason you haven't done so is that my own Google search turned up nothing. Oh well...



(... Dude sat up here putting MLK in the same category as Condy Rice...)

quote:

Originally posted by IRONHORSE:
Nmaginate, first of all, stop side-stepping the fact that you resorted to acting niggerish, yeah, I said it, NIGGERISH, instead of interacting with me, from the get go, in an objective, open-minded, intellectual manner.

Secondly, you haven't answered the challenge you gave me--what have YOU done to make a change in black society?

Ironhorse, what does it mean to act niggerish? Have you in your ignorance equated being a "nigger" to a particular behavior that you think is fundamentally sound? I would imagine you think by redefining "nigger" to be a particular behavior you believe you remove yourself out of the "Nigger catergory while throwing everyone else in it? OK.

Secondly, while those things you claim to have done if you have actually done them should be applauded, they are in no way verifiable by anyone on this forum thus what use do they serve except to serve as a means of making you appear to be something you very well may not. Furthermore if Nmaginate, myself or anyone on this forum listed various things we have done and continue to do, how would you verify the validity of those things or would you then say, well because I did one more thing than you I am better than you? No one here cares what you do and truthfully those who do work on behalf of our people feel no need to brag about it yet alone try and use it to lift one self up in the eyes of others.

From several of your post it appear that you have a problem with the men and women on this forum mainly as I can see it because we do not subscribe to the elitist attitude you have which you interpret as us thinking we are better than you. Most of us on this forum have gotten to know one another over the years through are disagreements and our agreements on this forum and other forums, thus for a Johnny come lately like yourself to come on the scene and try to tell us about who we are and then try to show us up with all the so call things you have done is laughable. If there is anyone suffering from delusions of grandeur on this forum it is you and using profanity does not make your point any more valid, in fact it lessens its validity.

Some of us have jobs, not to mention a life, and don't have the time to donate to arguing with obtuse, obnoxious people that are self-proclaimed, in the know of afroculturalism.

quote:

IRONHORSE, I didn't ask you about Thurgood Marshall...

You're right, Nmaginate, in your beligerent eagerness to prove you can express yourself,you imposed yourself in a part of the conversation that was entended for Frenchy.

I have such disdain for some of you people--you act EXACTLY like high school children--you want to have the balls to show your ass but you whine and cry at the unwelcoming response to your childish actions. Furthermore, it is to laugh at how you support and back each other up, like a gang of hoodrat kids when someone challenges you for your disrespectful, disorderly actions.

Who gives a damn if you expressed yourself eloquently if the content of your expression was biased and self-serving? Most of you defeat the purpose of what you post in these discussions because you seek to impose your own personal views on people that you don't think subscribe to your precise beliefs.

What kills me about you people is you take this site TOO SERIOUSLY. Sure, it's fine if you have evidence, a direct link, supporting what you've said but if a person DOESN'T have the evidence doesn't make what he or she said any less relevent. I've written many dissertations, grants, proposals, curriculums and presentations--I am WELL aware of how to quote and provide evidence from sources, resources, create bibliographies, YADDA, YADDA, YADDA.

I don't have anything to prove to you--if I do have evidence to back up my comments, fine--if I don't have link to support what I said then TOUGH SHIT--you just going to have to suck it up and move on but it most DEFINATELY doesn't make you a better person if you can support your information with links and other various sources.

Some of you idiots remind me of another idiot that attendeda book signing at a bookstore in Maryland where, Henry Louis Gates Jr. appeared to present his encyclopedia africana collection. Of all the hard work he and his constituents invested into putting such a valuable source of information together, thousands of otherwise unknown but influential blacks in American history, this one idiot stood up and expressed his dissappointment because her great great grandaddy, Cyrus Pookie Jones, wasn't mentioned in the book. Pure ignorance.

Faheem, some of you people have this rude habit of being too eager to show how smart you are instead of just simply asking for clarification, and engaging in productive conversation--you can't just ask for clarification or insert an opposing opinion, you have to resort to using indirectly snide, rude, obnoxious, obtuse, close-minded, crab-hearted comments and statements. Some of you employ this sly, underhanded method of trying to belittle someone while getting your point across--in my opinion, that is being niggerish.

It's not that deep--when I respond to people's discussions I don't jump into snap judgments, making long, superfluous statements, laiden with quotes, about what I believe is right and wrong. I simply respond with an opinion or advice and move on. Since the first day I've been in here, some of you people have been trying to enforce on me how you do things in africanamerica.org

This is a free site--people are free to join, therefore they have the freedom to express themselves on any level they feel is necessary. Who are you people to tell me or anyone else that is new to this site otherwise? And you wonder why half of these discussions are six months to a year old--you wonder why out of over 800 members, no more than six or seven people are online at a time--you wonder why, out of an average of 150 views, only an average of 35 people bother to post (give or take the repeated responses and viewings)--it's because they don't want to be ridiculed, harrassed, and judged for posting a personal opinion.

Some people would like to take pleasure in posting a thought, an opinion, a discussion that may go against the grain and not be attacked and overanalyzed for doing so. For this site to have such a significant number of intelligent people, this is one of the most inhospitable sites I've ever joined. Of course I know some of you are eager to respond by saying, "If you don't like this site then stop whining and leave." Nah, that would be too easy. I'll just stick around and grow on you.

quote:

Originally posted by IRONHORSE:
Faheem, some of you people have this rude habit of being too eager to show how smart you are instead of just simply asking for clarification, and engaging in productive conversation--you can't just ask for clarification or insert an opposing opinion, you have to resort to using indirectly snide, rude, obnoxious, obtuse, close-minded, crab-hearted comments and statements. Some of you employ this sly, underhanded method of trying to belittle someone while getting your point across--in my opinion, that is being niggerish.

It's not that deep--when I respond to people's discussions I don't jump into snap judgments, making long, superfluous statements, laiden with quotes, about what I believe is right and wrong. I simply respond with an opinion or advice and move on. Since the first day I've been in here, some of you people have been trying to enforce on me how you do things in africanamerica.org

This is a free site--people are free to join, therefore they have the freedom to express themselves on any level they feel is necessary. Who are you people to tell me or anyone else that is new to this site otherwise? And you wonder why half of these discussions are six months to a year old--you wonder why out of over 800 members, no more than six or seven people are online at a time--you wonder why, out of an average of 150 views, only an average of 35 people bother to post (give or take the repeated responses and viewings)--it's because they don't want to be ridiculed, harrassed, and judged for posting a personal opinion.

Some people would like to take pleasure in posting a thought, an opinion, a discussion that may go against the grain and not be attacked and overanalyzed for doing so. For this site to have such a significant number of intelligent people, this is one of the most inhospitable sites I've ever joined. Of course I know some of you are eager to respond by saying, "If you don't like this site then stop whining and leave." Nah, that would be too easy. I'll just stick around and grow on you.

This is indeed a free site Ironhorse and no one can stop you from posting nor do anyone whish to stop you from posting here. Those of us who have been and continue to be here do not wonder about the things you mentioned, we know why they are such, thus that only leaves you to wonder. It is funny how you throw out several adjectives to describe one act and then accuse us of trying to show how smart we are. The only person who has mentioned or bothered to post their resume of work is you, but we are being accused of showing off.

Those who have found aa.org inhospitable are mainly those who can not hold their own on this forum for the exact reason that you stated, this site has a significant number of intelligent men and women thus I know from being here for a few years that many of those whom have registered never post because they are afraid to have their B.S. put to shame. You listed all the things you do not do, have you taken the time to actually look at what you are doing that have brought about the responses your writtings have received?