Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
DEAL: For $25 - Add A Second Phone Number To Your Smartphone for life! Use promo code SLASHDOT25. Also, Slashdot's Facebook page has a chat bot now. Message it for stories and more. Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 Internet speed test! ×

Comment Historical Economic and Social Manipulation (Score -1, Offtopic) 204

Racism shouldn't be wearing thin unless you failed history class. All groups coming out of a state of unclassed citizenry had a long time of second-class citizenry that followed.

If you want to see a parallel with Jews, that would be a quick and easy comparison we could otherwise review at length. Under the rule of Islam nearly a millenium and on half ago, most Jews were actually banned from Jerusalem. Side note, during this time, the city, being the site of Mohammed's ascension, was the location that the Islamic Caliphate instructed to which all worship/prayer should be directed, and not Mecca. After they were allowed back into their city in general, they had brief relief under the peaceful and open terms of the Constitution of Medina, which was neither funky or cold.

However, the preceding 200 years of Christian abuses under Byzantium, like, the popularized sermon of "St." John Chrysostom's 'Against the Jews' and 'On the Statues, Homily 17', resulted in groups, like the Sunni, to adopt a very anti-Jewish stance (which may have been the source of the two very anti-Semitic statements in the Quran)*. They would be forced out of the region altogether, along with any non-Muslim groups. This wave would reverse and the pro-Constitution of Medina crowd would win out, heralding a Renaissance-like atmosphere of Jewish advancement...until about the start of the second millennium.

Anti-Semitism finally became a permanently integrated into Islamic practices and social culture. The Granada Pogrom would follow re-instituted segregation, kicking off a solidly anti-Semitic millennium. Being Jewish meant restrictions to food in droughts, water sources at all times, ownership of land, the ability to live or work an populous areas and an extra tax on all aspects of your life. Jewish access to education was limited to their own internal provisions, and during some periods, altogether.

As they were always a minority in just about every city and land, they could do nothing about it forcibly, and they were easily prevented from holding any office of value, and in some places, they would not be allowed to go by titles that may have been suggestive of an important position, which ended a brief period of using lingua franca for their titles, thus today, Rabbi is still more generally used than Teacher*. The extremes even included not being able to defend themselves if children up to the age of 15 and even 19 were to start throwing stones.

* * * * *

And now, the condensed time frame of Aftrican Americans, because there is more than some merit for the comparison you chose*.

As we all know, approximately three minutes after the reading of the Emancipation Proclamation, the slaves rose up, defeated the Confederacy, were given land, post-Confederate pension and free education.

This would later be mirrored by other decisions, like not outlawing cannabis when the only witness the Senate could produce clearly testified non-medical use was relatively harmless from an objective perspective. After all, it's not like the Senate would ignore the closest thing to an empirical study they could obtain, declare a cause of, "It's for the chilldren," all for the purpose of creating an excuse to put quotas on Mexican immigration.

WHOA! Sorry, neither of these happened that way. Crap, now I'll have to burn all of my, what did those stinking Mexicans call it? "Marijuana?" That DOES sound more dangerous than the cannabis Queen Victoria used to help with her menstrual cramps and headaches.

Believe it or not, the intent was to do nearly that, the Emancipation thing, not the weed thing. However, the Confederate soldiers kept their pensions, land was made available as part of the usual expansionist grants, and education was whatever poorer areas that the majority of the pseudo-post enslavement sub-culture could afford to live in*.

The Freemen were originally to have all the rights of citizen available to them; however, much of the post-Confederate former-Confederate citizens didn't fully agree with that idea, and I am not merely referring to those who wore sheets to keep their purely humanitarian acts anonymous*. Many countered the land claims, while riots and general lynchings risked bringing the United States back into civil war*, as a result, the federal programs put into place to assist in the advancement of equality African Americans were almost dropped entirely.

With few resources, few places to safely live and a highly limited education system*, blacks weren't likely to rise up. Their ability to vote was challenged as a States' Rights claim, and when that was lost by Constitutional amendment, literacy requirements and poll taxes would still prevent blacks from obtaining a better life for themselves. Anyone getting a high enough office to help often got run out of the area. It was an easy system to maintain oppression for a century, as in nearly every state, they remained a minority.

You can oppress a minority's rights indefinitely with such tactics*. This is the /lynch/ pin of the two arguments. When a majority refuses to acknowledge the equality of a minority, whether it's Jews in Arab countries, Blacks in pre-Civil Rights US or BSD users on Slashdot, it's relatively easy to prevent them from obtaining many rights for a very long time*.

Anyone smarter than BSD user might think everything changed in the 60's. It did, but nowhere near as fast as headlined events may have allowed it to appear. Upward mobility really only begins in the 50's and 60's, with significant effectiveness in the 70's; however, racism didn't just magically disappear. The news would skim over companies and governments demolishing the poorest neighborhoods for transportation and commerce. Much of those individuals rented, which meant they were given enough money to move to another under-managed tenancy, if those interests had to give any money at all. Amazingly, the news was quick to cover when someone associated with any black community had some legal troubles, whether it was drugs or violence, often making assumptions to link the groups with such activities.

You may think the police would take care of those problems; however, even before internal violence made such places feel Bosnia during the war, the police had all but officially made it an, "If they need us, they can come here," policy. Blacks who had realized their state of abandonment attempted to organize groups to help protect and provide for each other. As the news quickly linked the worse among them as being characteristic of those therein*, such groups began to attract more and more of those with such tendencies. The psychological impact of those in politics and among employers began to superficially mirror that of their post-Confederate former-Confederate counter-parts; however, this time, the focus wasn't equality and rights as human beings, but fear of strong criminal proficiency as a special class among the poor.

This isolation continues to this very day, which is why the majority of African American descendants in politics, academia and community organizations insist on maintaining the laws that were designed to prevent overtly or covertly practicing racist tendencies. Black unemployment has always been twice as high because the initial conditions persist: They largely live in poor areas with few economic opportunities and little availability of protective services. They are still portrayed in the media in connection with the type of crimes associated amongst any concentration of the poorest individuals and groups. The psychological effects are still evident in a number of empirical test -- a number of which have even been reported here on Slashdot.

If you want to know why African Americans are still a second class citizenry, if you have managed to read all of this, and could be bothered to look into it with the resources you clearly have access to, just read your post again. Yes, "The acting white," along with, "Keeping it real," and, "Stop snitchin'," type of community isolation has an impact, but it is not the greatest statistical effect on the individuals therein. What you just sharted on to Slashdot's chest is the primary current cause, and it's been evolving from the past 150 years of your apparent (just like appearances) attitude.


*(which may...statements in the Quran): Unless Moses wrote the Torah and the Disciples wrote the New Testament, in which case, despite things like the Constitution of Medina, apparently Mohammed had a real asshole streak that doesn't match most of what is otherwise documented about him.

*Rabbi...Teacher: "Teacher," sounds so much better than, "My Master," or the intended, "The Abundant One Who is Here for Me." It may be worth noting that Biblical translations calling Jesus, "Teacher," or, "My/Our Master," is actually calling him Rabbi.

*****: This is a section break. I could have called you a lot of things, but I'm me...I wouldn't have felt the need to censor myself that way.

*And now...comparison you chose: You have this idea that the Jews somehow underwent a transition quite recently, I'm guessing because of the Second World War. There are some very extreme differences, mainly focused on the efforts of multiple nations and the modern ability for people who were never present to see the events themselves. The US had to deal with its treatment of minorities at itsown rate, which is heavily hindered by people who have severe difficulties with recognizing anyone but themselves as a full-fledged equal human beings. Someone who would make the points you have despite having access to some massive world-wide repository of knowledge would certainly appear to fit this know appear, as in, not putting in any effort to look into their own claims, views or opinions would appear like they're forcing an agenda rather than attempting an know, appear, a superficial review, you know, superficial, like appearances. Circular logic has many uses.

*and education...afford to live in: You know, starting with nothing, if they got started at all. It may surprise you to know that not blacks were de-enslaved, only those under a certain age. There we even challenges in courts to get some of them back if they were freed by a proceeding Union army.

*and I'm not...acts anonymous: It sure is amazing how a pack of good ol' boys causing trouble could get their drink on once and start a new tradition of no excuse needed lynching. You know, if they had robbed their victims (which many cases suggest they did), they would have been eligible to patent a business model on it today (because in the US, intellectual property is as diminishable as real property).

*while riots...into civil war: "General lynchings," is a what you might call, "An inflationary policy." You see, it didn't matter what race the individual was, nor the race of adult men he was found near at the time of the attack -- in general lynchings, lots of people are eligible to be beaten and killed. And don't forget about raping the women folk!

*With few education system: Keep in mind that the current system is better and more open pre-Separate but Equal, and the Separate but Equal system was superior to, "If your nigger kids come to our kids school*, we'll kill them; so, you better keep 'em at home, or we'll have to stop by for visit someday."

*You can oppress...with such tactics: This is the very reason why we tend to specifically link Blacks over most other groups with the word minority in discussing politics, society or economics in the United States.

*When a majority...very long time: I specifically wanted to note the term Civil Rights. If you have ever worried about Liberals taking your guns away, you are a Liberal. Liberal means someone who protects, maintains or expands Civil Liberties (or Rights to prevent self-referencing). Civil Liberties are those stated, interpreted or unstated non-conflicting*. The stating of Civil Liberties is THE WHOLE BILL OF RIGHTS. Rights are opposed by Powers, the ability of an individual, group or government to act against your interests, stated or unstated. Powers are expressed by Authoritarians, Rights by Liberals. Taking something is Authoritarian, protecting it is Liberal. I cover this because people with appearances (as previously mentioned) such as yours tend to roll their eyes when that phrase pops up, completely unaware that it doesn't actually apply to just a minority, but again, biases of terminology in the United States is a major issue that needs to be dealt with in covering this topic.

*As the news...of those therein: You might notice this with the highlighting of the racists that were heavily linked to the Tea Party, or the near Theocratic groups that have been considered to be inherently Republican. The news is funny that way. It is economically considered the reason why free-to-pursue practices of government provided institution, like the BBC, tend to obtain a greater level of trust internationally.

*****: This informs you there's a special section of footnotes coming up. I just said you sharted; so, again, if I really wanted to call you something, it'd probably have been here*.

*"If school,": Like the earlier, "Stinking Mexicans," line, this is a hypothetical example; however, due to the seriousness of the term, I felt the need to clarify it for those who may be offended.

*Civil Liberties...non-conflicting: In the other two forms, interpreted would be Brown v Board of Education, when the Judiciary branch reviews a situation and applies an interpretation of protecting what will then be recognized as rights. The unstated non-conflicting example would likely be choosing to add chocolate chips to your ice cream.

*This informs you...have been here: I'm sorry, you know what, I flicked my eyeballs over your post again, and if nothing here has changed your perspective, I want to be clear, if and only if that remains the case, you are a complete piece of shit. Go back to Europe, you inbred ignorant fuck; I find you offensive as a human being and annoying as someone who may one day be screaming from the Heart of The Fires of the Damnation of the Ignorant Soul.*

*I'm sorry, you...Ignorant Soul: I could have avoided karma loss and went anonymous here, but I've been typing out a virtual research paper, and I'm going to take credit for it.

Slashdot Top Deals

When Dexter's on the Internet, can Hell be far behind?"