Did integration help or hinder black people?

MELANET UnCut Chat and Discussion: MelaNet UnCut Talk: Did integration help or hinder black people?
MatinCruse on Tuesday, January 18, 2000 - 03:22 am:

I think black people are worse off AFTER
integration than before it. The whole idea of it
was the "get in good with the white folks cause we
cant do it alone" self hating ingnorance. Yes a
few of us have prospered to great hieghts but the
majority have suffered. We had a strong sense of
family and community, we supported our own
businesses more, and we never would have tolerated
the flow of crack into our communities.

We even had better schools with black teachers and
a higher litarcy rate...all BEFORE integration.

As it turns out we were not ready for Integration.
black people neede to go through a reconstruction
of the way we think and act before integrating
with whites. We neede to learn to love ourselves
before we could learn to love white people too.
Blacks should have been asking for better schools
and freedom to govern and plice ourselves without
white intervention and oppression FIRST. THEN
after a couple of years of reconstruction,
becoming self sufficient and laying down some
roots to grow from, we integrate. If we had done
that, we would be prospering instead of suffering

what do u guys think, should we have integrated

By swo on Wednesday, January 19, 2000 - 08:41 am:

hey martin, i think we had to intergrate
because things were "separate" but
unequal, with intergration, we made a few small
steps...but as a people, we looked to assimilate
into the dominant culture instead of making sure
that we kept our identity, culture and history..
it's truly been a double-edged sword

By Webini (Webini) on Wednesday, January 19, 2000 - 03:42 pm:

I think you said it right SWO. I think without integration there would have been no way to really start in this country given the history of racism. I do, however, believe that Blacks missed the "reconstructionary" period here in America.

By DonnaRenee on Wednesday, January 19, 2000 - 08:30 pm:

Actually Martin I think you are correct infact what you say is what me and several of my sorors have said for years. We lost alot and have not gain anything that would not have been gained if we would have stated in our own community. We would have still been able to educate ourselves and the job market would still be the same as now if we would have waited awhile on integration.

Our biggest problem is we lost something during those Jim Crow and reconstruction years. I really don't think that African American are aware of the huge gap in our community. W.E.B Dubois talked of the "Talented Tenth" becoming the ruling class amoung African American. He was correct except the talented tenth no longer lives in his community and either to busy or don't care to give back. In fact we have surpassed the the talented tenth. Upwardly moving Africans Americans are rising in numbers. Our incomes are soaring but we still have the same community base problems as before.

It take me and those around me awhile that we can educate ourselves out the ghettos with high incomes but the social problems still remained. I despite the my income and education am more likely to be rob, raped or murder by a African American. So the complete answer is not to merely educate myself and move out of the slums but to improve them with what I have learned. Improve them by hoping I can reach at least one Black youth. But believe me this is so hard because if you live in the ghetto NOW is the only thing that is important. Because NOW is the only thing tangible. Fast cash now not four years from now.

Sad thing is I really don't think integration ever really happend. Because when we move in they always moved out.

By MartinCruse on Thursday, January 20, 2000 - 02:06 am:

The fact remains that, for an exception of a small
but lucky few of us, we are still VERY separate

Integration did not give us really any kind of
start cause whoever becomes successful wants to
leave the black community cause it is dangerous
and doesn't give anything back to it.

We are becoming successfull as individuals but not
as a people and community.

If you don't beleive me try to catch a taxi cab in
New York. lol

Integration may have been the beginning of our end
Sad but true.

By Cheri on Friday, January 21, 2000 - 12:32 am:

I think as someone said before - integration was necesary at the time, but we took it a bit too far - it was nice when all "classes" lived in the same neighborhood - you could see the doctors, lawyers, funeral home directors, teachers, and janitors every day.

By sister T on Friday, January 21, 2000 - 01:46 am:

i agree martin, 100%. by this so-called integration, we gave up a wealth of knowledge and treasure for a few pennies and a pipedream. we are on our way though, if there is a god and i believe there is (ALLAHUAKBAR), then success is not far behind.
sister T

By sister T on Sunday, January 23, 2000 - 12:04 am:

X!:on ignore.

By African Brother on Sunday, January 23, 2000 - 01:12 am:

I do not think if MLK or Malcolm X were alive today would agree with you Martin Cruse/Stop lying. You worry about catching a taxi in New York, but have you ever had to live with having to use amenities reserved for whites only, sat at the back of a bus, drank from a separate water fountain, or have been refused entry to a public place because of your color.

Unfortunately black America was robbed of much of its leadership, and the past 30/40 years have been a difficult learning experience.

Each generation has its own problems, and these problems must be dealt with and resolved in our time for us to go forward.

Legalized segregation is wrong, and definitely enforces a separate and unequal society. Preferred segregation in which communities stick together, network with each other, and build healthy communities is what most societies do, be they Jewish, Italian etc, and in this there is nothing fundamentally wrong.

A lot of what I have read in this forum seems to be endorsing or working towards encouraging some form of segregation. If this segregation is based on the empowerment and upliftment of people through mutual understanding, respect, and caring for one another, then there can be nothing wrong with it. If however it is to divide people through hate and fear then nothing good can come of it.

"The only way to stop the hate, is to segregate", this is just one of the rallying cries of the Aryan Nation. This anthem of fear and hate sounds very similar to the one chanted here.

We can choose to work together for the good of all our children, or we can go back to our caves and sharpen our spears. The reconstruction period is taking place, lets not allow a culture of hate and destruction to destroy whatever future we may have together.

Martin Cruse/Stop Lying, I as you do, wish to expose people to the truth, but a singular myopic view of history as well as people in general, detracts from the sincerity of the message.

By MartinCruse on Sunday, January 23, 2000 - 06:03 am:

Well african brother yes they would agree with me.
Im sure u know little of Malcolm X and Martin
Luther King past what the general public knows.

Truth be known, Malcolm X WAS against segregation
cause he believed (and was right) that white
america will never accept us as equals. Malcolm
was more about doing for ourselves and self
defense. This meant striking back at those who
struck us. Perfectly logical if u ask me.
This of course scared the hell out of america
seeing Minorities with guns (Black Panthers)
policing ourselves, and protecting ourselves from
white oppression. We should have listened to X if
u ask me.


King on the other hand was more passive (and
less intimidating) to white America. He preached
the "We Are the world" bit that he is so famous
for.....but towards the end of his campaign he was
changing his strategy to a more agressive one
(like Malcolm) upon realizing that the tactic of
appealing to White america's emotions was NOT
repeat NOT working. Doing so would eventually
get him killed. I have read about this African
Brother. It is true. There are books about the
truths of king's campaign. U'll probably have to
search for them though. I'll suggest some for u
though later.

You are correct in saying that I have not had to
deal with colored only signs, being attacked by
white people and presegregation hostilities of the

But I HAVE had to worry about driving into a
BLACK COMMUNITY and being shot, robbed, car jacked
by one of my OWN people. Before integration we
had nothing but eachother. After segregation some
of us have a little more but we DO NOT have
eachother. Its almost like we sold ourselves out.
Id rather be hit over the head by a white man than
another black man of my own race!!! The klu klux
klan was even quoted as saying "they have killed
more of themselves than we ever could have

However I do agree 100% with what u said about
preferred versus legalized segregation. The
problem is that for a community too grow and
uplift itself, it first has to LOVE itself. And
that African Brother we do not do.

So what i was trying to say is that i wish we had
the reconstruction period BEFORE segregation not
AFTER. I never said that we should never

You think the reconstruction period is happining
now in America? Have u been to a ghetto in
america? Degredation is the only way to explain

Read this then tell me if you really think this
reconstruction period is happening now.

1. million black men in prisons and big
corparations profit from the prisons in the
2. 70% of families without fathers
3. crack brought into black communities by whites
4. black on black crime (self hatred) higher than
5. 70% of aids cases are black!!!
6. no black owned businesses
7. more illiteracy after integration than before
etc., etc., etc.,......

I seriously doubt that Malcolm and Martin would
walk into a black community today and say they are
glad we interated.

A singular myopic view of history? The above facts
can be proven African brother. This is not opinion
its fact!!! And a lot of blacks are agreeing with
me on my opinions on segregation. And singular
myopic view of history has been given by Europeans
for a millenia. Hence Egypt is now not considered
black but european or of mixed races.

To tell you the truth African Brother...I am more
worried about black people comming together in
peace in harmony than black and white. Black and
white peace would be nice but it can't happen
without black peace first

By African Brother on Sunday, January 23, 2000 - 10:37 am:

Are these things you speak of, not a direct result of the effects of slavery on black America, rather than integration itself ?

Everything you point to above seems to me, to show the system as the direct cause. A system bought about by racism and oppression. A system which tolerates hatred, which places very little value on life, a system which allows the drugs into the communities, a system which allows racial profiling, a system which provides no real safety to the poor, and deprives them of an education.

Has this system been brought about through integration, or is it not a direct result of slavery and oppression of the black people of America ?

As to making peace with each other, I belive that if you have peace within, then you can make peace with all God's people regardless of race or color.

By jahreal on Tuesday, January 25, 2000 - 05:06 am:

......according to Bros. Shabazz and ben-Ammi....
the struggle of the 60's ,which came to be known
as the civil rights movement, was herded or
railroaded into what became a struggle for
integration . The issues involving Afrikans as
former slaves and the conditions associated with
that travesty were never addressed. Our struggle
, defined very clearly 80 years ago by Marcus
Garvey ,was , is and will remain one for Human
Rights .
....in hindsight we can see , as has been posted, that the civil rights movement has had it's
teeth extracted........no disrespect to those who
marched intended......but we are now more
dependant than ever on the " good will" of others
......for ALL our basic needs.......almost powerless.......though most of us, still
have our minds. This holds true for the social
climbers also. Powerless. We basically have two options
to chose from.......Consumer/Criminal. The
shitstem prospers from both of these. So, we can
see the shitstem controls your food , your shelter
, your job, and your God. Landless, and visionless

By Mosheshe (Mosheshe) on Tuesday, January 25, 2000 - 07:44 am:

jahreal, that's a very strong post. i agree with what you spitting about this intergration thing. I am in greenwood, ms and i know about powerlessness through mis socialization. The 1960s was definitely a lesson in social tactics. We have not overcome, yet, with information from minds like yours we will see the light. I got my eyes on you.

peace bring the pain in mississippi let it burn with the fire of black desire

By MartinCruse on Wednesday, January 26, 2000 - 03:51 am:

Your right African Brother.

Integration did not bring about all of those
wrongs, the system did.

But a too early integration weekend and split up
the black community. As a result we were no long
ABLE to fight all of the wrongs in the system.

Remember i never said never integrate!!! It just
turned out that the black community was not
mentally prepared for it because we still think
like slaves.

This slave thinking changed the movement from
being about fighting for our rights to being about
integration. And integration in the slave mind
is... "Getting in good with the white folk cause
we cant do it ourselves." The slave mind is not
thinking equal rights, the slave mind is thinking
"white is rights."

We still had that slave mentallity when we
integrated so integration ended up hurting us.
Many of us get in good and "move up" into a white
neighboorhood and dont give anything back to those
who have not made it. Or worse yet keep others
from making it (Clarence Thomas etc.).

So thats why I say we integrated to early.
Should have rebuilt our minds first, socialized
with white people lata. But EVENTUALLY yes we
should integrate after this thinking is erased

By jahreal on Wednesday, January 26, 2000 - 05:31 pm:

Greetings Mosheshe,
Respect to all everytime. My breddah,....better
to keep all eyes on the prophet Garvey..seen?
Still, the most intelligent solution for IyahnI
(our, ours, we, wezins,us and us-ins) problem in
the west...... whatcha seh bout' dat..Moshe ?
Good plan breddah Cruse.,.......but.......I don't feel ya on the integrating too early
reasoning........we should never seek to integrate
but seek to have equal rights to trade.....this is
a whole new ball game now.....and trade from an
established land base......a home.....can we
really feel at home here in the west.......should
we feel at home here ? Let's examine Garvey's plan.

By jahreal on Sunday, January 30, 2000 - 08:30 am:

"It would be untrue to the faith of my fathers,
untrue to my conscience,untrue to my Gods,If I did not stand on a platform of racial
Righteousness, racial truth, racial honour, and
racial self-respect"- {Marcus Mosiah Garvey}

By Fertile Ancient Thoughts on Sunday, January 30, 2000 - 06:53 pm:

America is a lie. They attempted to justify our holocaust with lies. They said we had no souls. They called us savages and heathens, beasts. They were determined to exploit, brutalize and terrorize us into "propertyless property." Slavery was a lie. So-called "Reconstruction" (fraudgulent period following the fictitious emancipation proclamation) was a lie. The constitution is a lie. All the so-called founding fathers of this COLONY (ask self, what is a colony?) were aliens, liars! Jim Crow APARTHEID was a lie. The civil rights movement was a lie, why the hell wasn't it called the Stolen Afrikan Liberation movement! We was tryina be able to live freely as hueman beings in a foreign land of downpression and confusion, pain, morbid misery, hopelessness. We was tryina be citizens and that was/IS a lie! So-called Integration been none but pure LIEZ! The Black Experience in AmeriKKKA is so bogus that it should be the worst lie anybody could possibly concieve within they imagination. America is a lie just like "African-American."

Don't giddem no claim to yo huemanity!!!
Stolen Afrikan Style Fertile like Anciency!
TruFF is da answer to all, any and every question!
Mosheshe, yo, you said it best bout dat fire! Fire pon Babylon!!! Burn Massa plantation! Burn English Language! Burn Ofe' education, media, government, religion.

"Joy, dem waan destroy all we joy, cyaan touch we joy, yo, in a we joy dem cyan destroy all we joy...
Da Youths no mix up in a wrong dealin, good herbs a burn chalis wit da smokin ya come an bus ya gun an ya back I'm beatin, me no trouble you wit ya pretty gul sleepin, me no trouble you when ya got ya food eatin, sell-out da ghetto youths you sight dem strivin, me go see say you've defiled and ya sin...

Me no business bout ya politick meeting, me no business da religion what you seek im, inna de ghetto youth business you de peepin, yo dis da ghetto gul world dem like no likin... All we joy, dem waan destroy all we joy cyaan touch we joy, yo inna we joy dem cyan destroy all we joy!" -Sizzla

Black folk during the middle of this last century like all Generations of captives was worse than upset and unhappy, we was ready to burn America down, but the civil rights movement discouraged this revolution for soft resistance. Revolution spills blood. A man defends hisself! What we fraid of? MLK, though he may have been changing his view, yall know how DuBois felt bout America when he FLEXED, skrait REPATRIATED!!!

Hey, yall, our nature is hueman, our natural culture is huemanity, TRUE communal-unity and family-oriented psychology. We got SOUL! We got rhythm, we got humor, we got melanin, light moods, powerful fertility, when healthy and peaceful da widest, deepest minds... no excuse, while we explanation is Ofe' invasion!

By Sistah Souljah on Thursday, February 10, 2000 - 01:26 pm:

Fertile Ancient Thoughts!! I just want to say that I have read alot of your responses to other questions, and to be of African man who's blood was unfortunately diluted with the devil's blood, you are the most revolution-minded person on this forum!! I would like to add my thoughts as well. I believe that integration has diluted our race and we have become even more lost than before because we are all trying to find ourselves through european customs, traditions, language, and history. That is all that they teach in the public schools. I never found out who I was in their schools, that is why we have so many lost youth today who don't have any more intrest in the schools because that ain't teaching them ••••!!! We all need a reeducation on who our friends and our emenies are. We need to know the truth about the real world. Everytime we try to establish something for ourselves, it gets destroyed by the white man cause he doesn't want to see us rise!!! Back in the 1920's in Oklahoma, that was black everything, we were very successful. By looking at that alone, we can see that we were better off then as opposed to know. Integration has damaged us emotionally, spiritually, and physically, especially with the accessiblity of the white woman to the black man. Integration was a hypocritical trick!!! The white man will never intergrate us into power of this country!!!! Until we all realize that, we will continue to try to get in good with them, thinking that we have arrived. Integration should not have been what we were fighting for. The real fight was for Human Rights, which we still don't have because of integration!!!!!!!! We are not free to be who we are, we are free to be like the cracker; a savage!!!! Integration has forced us segregate from each other in order to fit into their world. Integration is just like slavery in a sense because it is distinguishing the "house niggas" from the runaway slaves who desire to be free! The white man is still the slave master and our jobs are the plantation. As long as there is white supermacy, slavery will always be here!!!!!!!

By Nathan Smith on Sunday, February 20, 2000 - 12:35 am:

Man, I hate the fucking white people. We need to rise up against the man and fucking destroy the white race. They would not be ••••, had they not had us to do everything for them. Damn white people. I encourage you, my brothers and sisters of the African race, rise up and kill the white man.
Thank you. If you would like to get in touch with me to talk about how the white man is oppressing you, like he is oppressing me, then my email is funkmasterblack@hotmail.com.

By ME! on Sunday, February 20, 2000 - 12:16 pm:




By African Brother on Sunday, February 20, 2000 - 12:23 pm:

Now Nathan, what makes you any different from "me" ?!. Can the two of you not see each others reflection ?

So now who losers when you two kill each other, fill me in, I'd like to know. Your mothers, family, friends, the world ?!

Get past the hatred, self loathing and fear. You two are on the path of self destruction.

"Me", is that you "X! of Loveland" ?!, got to wonder what they call you "The lover from Loveland", would be my guess !

By me's mama on Sunday, February 20, 2000 - 01:43 pm:

"me", you escaped the basement again?
get yo ass back home, yo daddy's waiting..

damn, a good faggot son is hard to find...

sorry folks, "me" is currently in therapy
and reading the bestseller "how to get yo
daddy's dyck out cha mouth, wif out him
knowing it".....hot off da presses

By Brothaontherun on Friday, February 25, 2000 - 02:45 pm:

I think segragation by force was not a good thing, but we adapted this environment into a world of self help and enrichment. Though there were things we did not have we created an alternative.

Intergration has removed the need for the alternatives. We somehow think we have full access to that idea of an American dream that we see, hear and read about all the time. Intergartion has forced us to make choices without thinking where as within segration you always had to be aware and assess what the possible alternatives were. I guess under every system there are those that will do well for wahtever reason and those that will never seem to get ahead, because of the measuring stick being used.

By Sistah Souljah on Friday, February 25, 2000 - 03:17 pm:

Dear Brothaontherun,


Are you really a brother, or is that your username?

By Teo on Monday, February 28, 2000 - 05:10 am:

I think he is saying that there are different advantages to either system. That when we were segregated we came up with our own businesses that substituted for the things that we were not allowed to access in white areas. Now we have assumed that we will be allowed to participate fully in this society and abandon looking for our own alternatives.
So we get to access some things that were not available to our grandparents, but we are still held back from certain goals.... and we have given up on making our own goals, because we still strive to reach the ones set by society at large.

Correct me if I misunderstood Brothaontherun.

By Teo on Monday, February 28, 2000 - 05:27 am:

I myself think that intergration was the only way we would know that we are not getting what we deserve. The people that found out things were not seperate and equal were allowed access to both sides of the fence.

The bottom line is that distributing monies to schools based on the property taxes of neighboring areas is a foul practice. We are one nation and the distribution should be handled on a federal level and be completely equal. That is why schools in lower income neighborhoods are in terrible condition. It doesn't have much to do with intergration at all.

The higher literacy rate was probably due to the fact that the elements that plague our youth today weren't as prevailent. There was no crack back in the day. Kids weren't toting around Tech nines either. Survival is more important than literacy for some kids. A book can't stop a bullet. That is also something that isn't related to intergration. They were trying to poison black neighborhoods back then too. They just didn't have poison that was as potent.

Preparing to intergrate is impossible. How would we know how to prepare? It was not something that had been done before. There was no precedent to use as a guide. Certainly we as a people could have benefitted from a healthy dose of self worth and love, though. That comes with time, and I doubt that remaining segregated would have sped the process. You have to know what is expected first hand. It's like preparing to cliff drive. You can't just dip your toe in the water.

By thetruth on Monday, March 6, 2000 - 09:19 pm:

Integration was the killing blow for most, if not all, of our strong black communities. We won a small battle but lost the war. Never in the histroy of the world have that many people of one race lost their jobs at one time. Job placement for blacks in the new integrated schools were 1 out of 100. That includes teachers, principals, cooks,janitors and others who were paid to look after our children. Were our children being taught or were they just allowed in? How many great minds, such as Malcolm X, were destroyed during this time? How much income did our communities lose? So, yes integration was the killing or crippimg blow for us as a people.

By GO BACK TO APE-FREAK-UH!!!!! on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 01:12 am:

The white taxpayer lost out bigtime! Public school tests scores lowered, racial bullshit, n.igger bullshit history promulgated by n.igger special interest! Segregation was the best thing that happened to the USA (outside of the fact Lincoln wanted to ship n.iggers back to ape-freak-uh or south america but he (unfortunately!!!!!!!) was shot before we moved you apes out!!!!!!! The USA would be better if n.iggers never arrived here! N.iggers are dragging the USA down!!!!!!!!!!

By white_sickness on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 08:40 am:

Go back to your frozen cave refrigerator in Europe and continue licking your pudgy a_ _ hole!

By Final solution for nigz! on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 10:07 am:

Go back to your ghetto and continue licking your skanky n.igger whore mammy's a.sshole, you shitskin punk b.astard!!!

By white booty bandit on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 10:43 am:

i'm a white faggot who feels so pitiful
until i spend all day posting on black
bulletin boards cuz i didn't get enough
attention from my cave mama, and too
much from daddy, ouch..i can't even sit down...

By Zulu on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 02:01 pm:

Look, Malcolm X understood the psychology of both white and Black America better than any other leader of our time. He understood the mindset of the Black integrationist (despite all of MLK's courage and valor--because any man who gives his life for our people deserves at least to be respected--he was still an integrationist). Malcolm X compared these brothers to dogs. That's because like dogs--and no i'm not calling MLK a dog--but like dogs they seldom think in terms of what's good for themselves. But they'll fight tooth and nail if you attack their master because they believe in his goodness-or potential goodness. White people FEAR US and are constantly worried about the need to control us--So much so that they'll even sit, talk, drink (out of water fountains), and have sex with us as long as they can be in control. THE ONLY TIME WHITE FOLKS WANT TO INTEGRATE WITH BLACK FOLKS IS WHEN THEY CAN DO SO IN A POSITION OF CONTROL. You don't see white people trying to INTEGRATE the Black Church--unless they consider our practices to be heathen! (e.g.PROMISE-KEEPERS).

Integration necessarily involves dependency beause we are always asking to be in their institutiions as if that will give us POWER--but Power is not given. Likewise when we integrated institutions, they didn't integrate "WITH ALL DELIBERATE SPEED" the teachers, principals, faculty, chancellors, history and Presidency of this country.


Understand that whites need us to define themselves. America is defined by what is unamerican--and Black Folk are considered UNAMERICAN (e.g., our clothes, hair, music-before whites capitalize on it, and speech). Euporeans HAVE NO unity--Not without us they don't. The history of Europe has been a history of war and perpetual conflict (the Balance of power). How on EARTH, can a person of Irish or Scotish descent live next door to an Anglo-Saxon? By coming to agreement on the inhumanity of Blacks--nothing has changed. For example, anybody who has set on any governing body with white folk undrstand that whites won't listen to what you have to say unless you're in agreement with them. One of the basic tenants of humanity is that you have an opinion--a will or pattern of thought independent of others.

Lastly, for me or any of my people to want to LIVE WITH a people who have produced such a record of BARBARISM and Violence towards an otherwise peaceful people--is insane. In fact, I believe it says more about my character than it does the white mans.

By jerrold on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 02:10 pm:

Well said, Zulu! Truth, no matter how heavy, will always rise to the top! Your analysis is first rate, your thought processes ironclad, your perspective is sound, and your willingness to fight for what is yours, I truly admire. Your Africentric ruminations are powerful, I love it! Malcolm X is God! My people (no integrationist boot-lickers, please) shaLL RISE AGAIN!!!!!

By bite me on Tuesday, March 7, 2000 - 10:01 pm:

That must be why Western Europe has formed the EU but in Africa, you have intertribal and national warfare, Zimbabwe just got flooded and are pissed off no n.igger countries came to their aid! That's UNITY for ya!!!!

By Donnarenee on Wednesday, March 8, 2000 - 06:10 pm:

Nice post Zulu

By ways of ofe on Sunday, March 19, 2000 - 12:31 pm:

Hypocisy as a Way of Life

By Marimba Ani. 7 February 1995

The following is from the book Yurugu by Marimba Ani. The publisher is Africa World
Press. This book is the book to
get if you ever wonder why white folk act the way they do. In it, Marimba Ani
explores the spiritual, historical and
psychological cause of European behavior and its effect on African people. I feel
that this is one of the best books
written about European behavior and its effect on African personhood. It is written
from an African center and is
thoroughly documented. If you buy nothing else this year get this book.

Hypocricy as a Way of Life

Within the nature of European culture there exists a statement of value or of
"moral" behavior that has no meaning for the
members of that culture. I call this the "rhetorical ethic;" it is of great importance
for the understanding of the dynamics of the
culture. The concepts of traditional European anthropology are inadequate to
explain the phenomenon to which I am referring
here, as it has no counterpart in the types of cultures to which anthropologists
have generally directed their attention in the past.
But with the concept of asili, which facilitates an ideological approach to the
study of culture, the rhetorical ethic becomes
visible; even compelling. It fits the logic of the European asili, assisting the culture
in the achievement and maintenance of
power. Without this interpretation certain manifestations within the verbal
iconography of the culture appear to be inconsistent
with its underlying ideological thrust. And that simply would not make sense. Let
us see how the mechanism of the rhetorical
ethic works.

The related distinction used traditionally in anthropology is stated in terms of "ideal
culture" and "actual behavior" and is said to
be characteristic of all cultures, thereby helping to confuse the issue of the
uniqueness and problematical nature of European
culture. The conventional distinction is illustrated in the following manner by the
authors of a recently published anthropology

For example, an idealized belief, long cherished in America, is that all doctors are
selfless, friendly people who chose medicine
as their profession because they felt themselves "called" to serve humanity, and
who have little interest in either the money or the
prestige of their position. Of course, many physicians do not measure up to this
ideal. Nevertheless, the continued success of
television programs that portray the average American M.D. as a paragon of virtue
indicates how deeply rooted in our
collective psyche the ideal of the noble physician is.

This is a common misconception that has led to a mistaken view and superficial
understanding of the nature of European (Euro-
American) society. To refer to the images offered above as "ideal" is a misuse or
at least a misleading use of the term "ideal."
The projection and success of the image of the committed, altruistic doctor do not
indicate that it is a "deeply rooted" ideal in
the American psyche.

It is rather an indication of the fact that this is how Americans want to appear to
others, most often to non-European
peoples-their "objects.'' In this case it is the way that the doctor wants to appear
to his patients, or ''objects,'' because this
appearance works to his advantage. On the other hand, an image that projects
him as a potential exploiter can lead to the
possibility of malpractice suits and to the institutionalization of socialized
medicine-neither of which is lucrative for him.

An ''ideal'' should be understood to be some thing that functions normatively and
something that is emulated; that which has
meaning for those who share it. It is the European experience that encourages the
confounding of meaning and commitment with
mere verbal expression. (It was within the incipient European experience that
"rhetoric" came to be regarded as art.) In African
culture words have power. The European mind is a political one and for this reason
constantly aware of the political effect of
words and images as they are used for the purposes of manipulation. By "political"
I mean to indicate an ego that consistently
experiences people as others; as representatives of interests defined differently
and, therefore, as conflicting with this "ego." The
individual is concerned, therefore, with the way in which his verbal expression and
the image he projects can influence the
behavior of those to whom he relates, be they patients (would-be consumers),
neocolonial subjects, an opposing candidate for
office, or an African selfdeterminist/nationalist. This is what is "deeply rooted" in
the American mind-the psychology of "public
relations," "salesmanship," and political strategy. It is in the Euro-American
vernacular that the word "image" is used so
frequently. To be concerned with one's image as opposed to one's self is a
European characteristic.

To be aware of the strategical advantage of appearing to be aItru- istic when one
is operating out of self-interest does not mean
that altruism is a meaningful "ideal" in terms of one's value-system. It is, instead,
an outgrowth of the propaganda that the
Europeans have fed "non-European" peoples since they first sought to conquer
them. Because they exported ("sold") this
altruistic image so successfully, they have had to project themselves as adhering
to this "ideal"; similarly, the projection of
themselves or their motives in this way has been essential to the successful
imposition of this "ethic" on others.

By ways of buckra on Sunday, March 19, 2000 - 01:07 pm:


The basic principle to be kept in mind in order to understand this dynamic of
European culture is that the major contributing
factor to the success of European nationalism has been its projection as
disinterested internationalism,

The use of "ideal" in the passage quoted above is simply an inad- equate concept
for the ethnological analysis of European
culture. Hoebel, in an earlier textbook, offers his version, which is similarly
inadequate: "Ideal Culture consists of a people's
verbally expressed standards and behavior." The examples that these
anthropologists offer from other cultures to explicate the
distinction between "ideal" and "actual" in no way represent the phenomenon in
Western culture under consideration.

Hoebel describes "normative postulates or values" as "deep- lying assumptions
about whether things or acts are good and to be
sought after, or bad and to be rejected."s This is precisely what the "rhetorical
ethic" is not. Hoebel's definition can be used to
get at the converse of the phenomenon I wish to describe. A "rhetorical ethic" is
not a "deep-lying assumption." It is a superficial
verbal expression that is not intended for assimilation by the members of the
culture that produced it. The "rhetorical ethic," a
European phenomenon, has been neglected in conventional ethnological theory,
which has consistently offered concepts devoid
of political significance.

Anthropologists talk about the gap in all cultures between thought and deed,
between ideas and actions. The gap to which I am
referring, however, is between verbal expression and belief or commitment;
between what people say and what they do.
Nowhere other than in European culture do words mean so little as indices of
belief. It is this characteristic that is of concern
here and this characteristic for which the concepts of traditional anthropology are
inadequate to explain.

As a cultural trait it has, however, been described by others, par- ticularly those
who have been made victims of European
cunning. Below an indigenous American describes European behavior:

They would make slaves of us if they could; but as they cannot, they kill us.
There is no faith to be placed in their

They will say to an Indian, "My friend; my brother!" They will take him by the hand
and, at the same moment
destroy him.... Remember that this day I warned you to beware of such friends as
these. I know the Long-Knives.
They are not to be trusted.

It is an inherent characteristic of the culture that it prepares members of the
culture to be able to act like friends toward those
they regard as enemies; to be able to convince others that they have come to
help when they, in fact, have come to destroy the
others and their culture. That some may "believe" that they are actually doing
good only makes them more dangerous, for they
have swallowed their own rhetoric-perhaps a convenient self-delusion. Hypocritical
behavior is sanctioned and rewarded in
European culture. The rhetorical ethic helps to sanction it. European culture
cannot be understood in terms of the dynamics of
other cultures alone. It is a culture that breeds hypocrisy-in which hypocrisy is a
supportive theme a standard of behavior. Its
hypocritical nature is linked to the Platonic abstraction, to objectification, to the
compartmentalization of the person and the
denial of the emotional self. Below Havelock characteristically understands the

Another thing noticeable about them [pre-Platonic" Greeks] in this period is their
capacity for direct action and sincere action
and for direct and sincere expression of motive and desire. They almost entirely
lack those slight hypocrisies without which our
civiliza- tion does not seem to work.

The distinction and definitions that can lead to a better under- standing of the
Europeans and their culture can only come from a
perspective that is not one of European chauvinism; for it is the method of
European chauvinism or cultural nationalism to
conceal European interest. As I use it, "value" is only meaningful value; it is that
which motivates behavior and is the origin of
human commitment. Value determines what is imitated and preserved, what is
selected for and encouraged. "Avowed values"
on the other hand, which are merely professed, which find expression only
verbally, which are not indicative of behavior, belong
to what I have called the "rhetorical ethic."

The European rhetorical ethic is precisely that-purely rhetorical- and, as such, has
its own origins as a creation for export; i.e.,
for the political, intercultural activity of the European. It is designed to create an
image that will prevent others from successfully
anticipating European behavior, and its objective is to encourage nonstrategic
(i.e., naive, rather than successful) political
behavior on the part of others. This is the same as "nonpolitical" behavior.) It is
designed to sell, to dupe, to promote European
nationalistic objectives. It "packages" European cultural imperialism in a wrapping
that makes it appear more attractive, less
harmful. None of these features represents what can culturally be referred to as
an "ideal" in any sense. The rhetorical ethic is,
therefore, not dysfunctional in European culture.

It does not generate nor reflect conflict in European ideology or belief-system; but
it is, rather, necessary to the maintenance
and projection of the utamaroho and performs a vital function in sustaining
European cultural nationalism in the pursuit of its
international objectives.

The rhetorical ethic is made possible by the fact that hypocrisy as a mode of
behavior is a valued theme in European life; the
same hypocritical behavior that its presence sanctions. Again, "value" refers to
that which is encouraged and approved in a
culture. European culture is constructed in such a way that successful sur- vival
within it discourages honesty and directness and
encourages dishonesty and deceit-the ability to appear to be something other
than what one is; to hide one's "self," one's
motives and intent.

People who are duped by others and relate to a projected image are considered
fools or "country bumpkins." Hypocrisy in this
way becomes not a negative personality trait, not immoral or abnormal behavior,
but it is both expected and cultivated. It is
considered to be a crucial ingredient of "sophistication," a European goal. European
intracultural, political behavior is based on
hypocrisy-as are business relations, the advertising media, and most other areas
of public, and social interaction. It is merely a
manifestation of this theme when Americans claim that politicians are basically
honest. The claim itself is hypocritical, and the
public expects it to be so. We all know that the objective of commercial
advertising is to convince us to buy products so that
manufacturers can make large profits, but the slogans attempt to persuade us
that the product is beneficial to our well being, as
though the producer has our welfare at heart.

This hypocrisy touches the lives of every member of the culture in their dealings
with one another, and yet it originates in part in
the nature of their intercultural relationships. It is a part of the mechanism of
European expansionism, All of these factors must
go into the understanding of the rhetorical ethic and not an overly simplistic
distinction between "ideal" and "actual" culture;
perhaps a relevant distinction with regard to other cultures that create and are
created by very different "cultural personalities."
Let us look more closely at this "ethic" and see how it has functioned historically.
The Rhetorical Function of the "Christian

By Bite a big one, n.igger! on Sunday, March 19, 2000 - 05:46 pm:


Characteristics of imprisoned rape and sexual assault offenders


While only 13% of the US population, Blacks commit 50% of all murders and 48% of violent rapes.

Table 2. Characteristics of imprisoned rape and sexual assault offenders

Offenders in State prison

Violent Rape
Sexual Assault
Estimated number of
offenders, 1994

Table 5. Characteristics of known offenders in murders involving sexual assault, 1976-94

Offender Charcteristic
All Murder
Sexual Assault Murder

By ignore_the_devil on Monday, March 20, 2000 - 08:55 am:

I see the devil has been busy .... Let us get busy on OUR program for community uplift. Ignore the devil everywhere.

By cheribum ( - on Thursday, April 6, 2000 - 07:10 pm:

I have never met anyone as sadistic as a whole as the white race. Not only do they take pleasure in killing us some (jeffewy dommer) even take pleasure in eating us. Make matters worse we forgive him in the name of Jesus. They drink addiction, pain and laugh.. We must be free of Sheitan (the devil) he has destoyed practically every living creature on the planet down an amoeba. and he laughs and plots more masechism. Train your children my brothers (Ma"at) and martial and weapons training is a plus(Remember Pharoah Sesostris the Father of Martial arts and a brother. You dont want you children being cooked up in one of their pots for stew. Needless to say i am opposed to integration. Intergration into what you say? A God forsakken country that is cursed, with no morals ethics. The good news is that their own childreen are killing themselves. So do unto others as they would do unto you. dont worry about it they are getting their ten fold!!!

By Inamilyun ( - on Saturday, April 15, 2000 - 07:19 pm:

I believe integration in many ways was a diservice
to black people, especially in the field of education. Before integration blacks went to black schools with black teachers who urged them to strive for excellence,"Be twice as good as them to make it". With integration many black teachers lost their jobs and students lost their role models and motivation. After all in such a racially charged era, if white childeren were placed with black ones the teacher would in most cases be white.

By AS IF WE DON'T KNOW NIGZ NIGS NEED TO BE DESTROYED!!! ( - on Sunday, April 16, 2000 - 05:29 pm:

Biloxi, Mississippi Celebrates Racism!
Not to be outdone by the Black College Reunion participants in Daytona Beach,
Florida, who caused tens of thousands of dollars worth of damage to the Adams
Mark Hotel, the "black enthusiasts" celebrating this event, descended on the
lovely coastal city of Biloxi.

Thousands of revelers drawn to Black Spring break 2000 virtually ignored formal
events booked by promoters and starred in their own show along a grid locked
US 90, jamming private parking lots to a booming bass soundtrack, overwhelming
police officers with their sheer numbers, and frustrating shopkeepers, whose
customers couldn't or wouldn't get close to their stores.

Official crowd estimates ranged from 10,000 to 30,000, a number police were
to handle. "We cannot control traffic," Harrison County Sheriff George Payne
said Saturday night. "We have more numbers of cars than the infrastructure can
handle...we are doing all we can to maintain order."

The traffic prevented customers from getting to businesses, kept residents from
leaving their homes, and made travel interminable in Biloxi and Gulfport. The
revelers also irritated and offended residents along US 90 that was jammed
and Saturday with partygoers. John Lestrade Jr. shared some beers Friday with
partygoers outside his house near Edgewater Mall, and then made a favorable
between Black Spring break and spring breaks in Florida. But his impression
later that night when he and some friends walked by a mall parking lot where
the party had reached a fever pitch. He said a crowd of black men taunted him
and one of them said, "What are you doing here, Whitey?"

While stuck in traffic on US 90 near Beau Rivage Casino, Kim Cohran of Biloxi
said she was shocked by what she saw. "A man pulled down his pants and urinated
in the street. Then he took a video camera and taped a young girl showing her
breasts," said Cohran, who told three young children in the car to close their
eyes. "I couldn't believe it. I was shocked, disturbed. I can't believe this
town would let this happen---that's indecent exposure!"

Frank Pellegrino first noticed the crowd Friday when he tried to get on US 90
where he lives. He saw the cluttered highway and heard police helicopters
overhead. "I thought there was a natural disaster," he said. Not far from his
house, young blacks partied in the mall parking lot where many had celebrated
late the night before. They gathered around cars thumping with loud music. They
hooted as young women danced and stripped on top of vehicles.

Jack Cordray, general manager of O'Charley's Restaurant at the mall said some
revelers walked out without paying their checks. He added, "We've taken a very
big loss this week." Minutes earlier, Cordray caught a black "partygoer"
on a wall outside his restaurant.

Outside at Edgewater Village across the mall, a Chrysler convertible with
tags occupied by four well-dressed young women drew attention from the mostly
male crowd. A dozen young men surrounded the car and one ripped a blouse off
a woman seated in the rear. That drew more attention as more than 20 men draped
themselves over the car, some videotaping the woman in her anguish. Five police
officers came to the woman's aid but were unable to take action against the
because of the crowd's size.

Finally, Mike Taylor, a 21-year-old black transplant from California said," I
know people were expecting a big wild bunch but there's nothing here but love."
What we have here is a lot of black love".

These individuals have no respect, no morals and were a definite threat to the
law-abiding citizens of these communities. Individuals who are raised to respect
others, to respect the property of others, don't, all of a sudden, decide to
act like animals in a zoo. Who is going to pay for the damage to all the
that were victimized by these individuals?

If these places decide to have some form of "control" over the crowd next year,
you can bet your last dollar that the NAACP will file a lawsuit against them
for discrimination. They did it last year against the Adams Mark Hotel, and
$8,000,000 dollars for it. They call this type of behavior, "Love". I would sure
hate to see any "Hate", if this is what they call "love".

A writer for a newspaper in Jacksonville, Fl., states: "these people are just
misunderstood and are only freely expressing themselves" Evidently, this is what
they mean by diversity! Wherever they gather, whether it is in Myrtle Beach,
SC, Daytona Beach, FL, Atlanta, GA or Biloxi, MS, the resulting social unrest
is rampant. Yet by even reporting these events, we will be labeled as racists.
Everything reported here is true and can be documented.

Like the "Boston Strangler", and others that have occurred over the years. These
type killings were always attributed to whites. Here is something that you will
not see reported on your local news, or in any newspaper in the country.

In the early 80's, two brothers, Nathaniel Cook and Anthony Cook, these two
Americans preyed upon young white couples in parked cars. They would confront
them, and rape the women before killing them. Anthony Cook, 51 acknowledged in
Lucas County Common Pleas Court that he was involved in all 9 murders. His
Nathaniel, admitted to only 3 murders.

Anthony Cook pled guilty to the murder of a Thomas Gordon. He was sentenced to
life in prison and is already serving a life sentence without the chance of
for a 1981 murder. However, his brother Nathaniel, pled guilty to two counts
of kidnapping and one count of "attempted" murder in the killing of Gordon's
girlfriend. He will be eligible for parole after 18 years.

Retired police detective, Tom Ross, said he believed that the killings were
motivated. Jeez, when the victims are all white, and the killer's black, what
other conclusion is there?

No death sentence for either one of them. Yet, they stalked and deliberately
murdered at least 9 people. One will be freed in 18 years; the other will remain
in prison for an unrelated murder. Lucas County prosecutor, Julia Bates,
the "plea" deal because it gives the nine families a peace of mind.
If we remember correctly, the two individuals who killed an African American
in Jasper, Texas were both sentenced to death. These two brothers who raped and
killed their victims will live out their lives, and one will go free in 18
We really don't believe that this "sentence" will give the families any peace
of mind whatsoever. Peace of mind would be making sure these two received the
death penalty!

By ruff ( - on Sunday, April 16, 2000 - 06:09 pm:

you white boys still got us beat in the
"eat ya victim, and store his body parts in
da freezer catagory"...

you cave dwellers kill me, literally...

lol, tick tock white boy, by the time it takes
you to cut and paste, one more cave bytch found
out she's infertile and 1,000 peeps of color
repopulated the world...betta get dat war started
soon son, u don't have much time whitebread...

By NIGZ DESERVE TO DIE!! ( - on Sunday, April 16, 2000 - 08:10 pm:

Yeah, go to ape-freak-uh and look up ethopia and the famine in the horn of ape-freak-uh. Look at the sub-saharan part of ape-freak-UH, there's not one part of ape-freak-uh that isn't being devastated by famine and drought, diseases running rampant like AIDS..........go to the following sites:


These are only a few sites that PROVE nigz are dying of disease, starvation, inter-nig wars, and just being monkeys in general!!!!!!!!!!

Better check on your facts, n.iggers in ape-freak-uh are dying in unprecedented numbers from all causes, the average life span in ape-freak-uh for n.igger mangs has actually decreased from the 60's to the 50's......................add to that the rampant (deserved) onslaught of n.iggers here, probably-if the numbers hold true-in the time it takes me to type this, a few dozen nigz were capped by their "brothaZ" all over the USA!!! Nigz all over are being killed by lots of reasons and nigz preoccupation w/sex (Do you think AIDS was an accident???!!!??), weather, the fact that nigz don't understand much more than what is in thier face.......which also explains why nigz are dying of natural causes ,in prison, poor, dying of disease, giving up, stuck in ghetttos in unprecedented numbers worldwide...........check your facts, punk ass n.iggerboy, yes, less whites are breeding but for an intelligent reason.....intelligence that has nothing to do with n.iggers anywhere.......but MORE N.IGGERS THAN EVER ARE BEING BRED INTO A WORLD OF PAIN, DISEASE, FAMINE, AND A WORLD THAT HATES THEIR VERY EXISTANCE!!!!!!!!!!! tick...tock...lots of n.iggers are being born, but they'll suffer a short life and die painfully-which is also what a n.igger deserves!!!!!!!!!!!time is running out for you apes.....tick tock......CHECK THE FACTS..........TICK TOCK....LOTS OF LSS NIGZ BORN THAN DYING.....TICK TOCK...........................

By the way, all those nigz ins S.Ape-freak-uh and Zimbabwe who are smart enough to take land from the most producing part of their country, but not smart enough to understand the long-term consequences of farming will BEG FOR WITH WHITE HELP IN LESS THAN 10 YEARS-BUT ONLY AFTER 100,000'S OF NIGZ DIE OF STARVATION!!!!!! FITTING JUSTICE!! TALK YOUR ••••..........TICK TOCK....LOTS OF SHITSKINS DYING.........TICK TOCK DOZENS.......LITERALLY AS THE HOURS TICK ON.....BETTER BREED HARDER N.IGGER....BECAUSE SO MANY N.IGGERR ARE DYING A DESERVED HARD DEATH!!!!!!!!!

By greg ( - on Monday, April 17, 2000 - 03:42 am:

DAMM you sure keep up whit news out of africa don`t you have somthing else to do like playing whit the kkk or having a golf party whit a nazi group instead of hanging in a BLACK site if you hate the blacks so much why do you even bother whit them why don`t you leave us allone and go and play whit the kkk or nazi`s or go and vote on al gore for president or by a good gun or timberland boot and shave your head bold.

By RUFF ( - on Monday, April 17, 2000 - 09:00 am:




By Darkoverlord ( - on Monday, April 17, 2000 - 03:23 pm:

Go to any website on Ape-freak-uh and check out the statistics, only this TIME NO-ONE is going to help out the starving n.iggers in Etiopia or Eratraia..........just more dead n.iggers on a continent that's fast going the way of the dinosaur!!!!!!!!!!!tick tock......

By Nnamdi ( - on Friday, November 17, 2000 - 12:00 am:

Unfortunately some of us refuse to acknowledge the reality of our history. Integration was and is a hoax. It never was and never will be what it pretended to be. Hindsight is 20/20 and any statement made here is not disrespectful to those who believed in the lies. Nevertheless, today is a new day. It is a brand new millennium. We have the benefit of history to inform us of the true direction for our people. Today it can not be denied that if we could accomplish all the things we have accomplished, as a people, here in the wilderness of Amerikkka then there is absolutely no thing nor no body (nor no anti-body) that could possibly stop us from reedeming our motherland Africa and creating the type of society that amerikkka could have become when we make it our purpose in life to do so. 'You-Know-Who' (even the allegedly 'liberal' ones) should be commended for having pulled off the hoax of integration for as long as they have. But that time is coming to an end. The posts on the topic at hand prove it. Most of us are coming awake at the speed of thought. We are no longer in a dream state. We are having visions of a promised land that is not the land of 'You-Know-Who'.

We realise today that had we known better we would have celebrated the fact that they did not want us to drink from the same water fountain as they did. It was basic reverse psychology. Deny us what we did not want in order to create a desire for it. Many of us experienced this during our own childhood. Anything that our parents told us not to do...we wanted to do that more than anything else. Denial created a desire. Had the 'You-Know-Who' not prevented us from eating at their lunch counters, we would not have had any desire to eat with them unless it was absolutely necessary. Africans were able to feed ourselves, clothe ourselves, heal our sick, give birth to our children, care for our elders, educate our offspring in the way of our people, be a benefactor for the less fortunate and smelt steel for thousands of years before we ever came in contact with a person who might want to consider themself to be 'You-Know-Who' or Caucasian or europeon and if it came down to it tomorrow we would feed ourselves without them as if they had never existed. History proves this. Africans who know their history know that our people have forgotten moor than europeons have ever known. Had we known at the beginning of the era of integration what we know today we would have left things as they were and got along as best we could. Because you see, we had done it before.

Go downtown today and find a restaurant owned by black people. During the working hours it is whites and asians only as far as getting paid for feeding the workers. In Washington, DC one of the best restaurants in the city is the BET JAZZ restaurant. And 'You-Know-Who' still won't or can't patronize it. Its not in their spirit to do so. And why should they patronize it??? Its not their restaurant. And its not their fault that we believe that giving our money to other people somehow gives us power. It needs to be recognized that no amount of money we give to Timmy Hilniggah or Ralph Lauren Hill will benefit our people as much as it benefits them. We need to make this the era of black power consolidation. Not integration.

By Nnamdi ( - on Friday, November 17, 2000 - 12:01 am:

Integration means that black people give away their power to other people. We give our power away when our youth are being used as fodder in the HWCUs athletic programs. Does amerikkka treat us with respect after we go to the olympics and win them respect and countless gold medals??? NOT!!! And we give our power away when we go to these HWCUs never thinking to use that education to uplift our motherland Africa, only to get a piece of the crumbling Amerikkkan pie.

Now we can safely say that the pleaders and misleaders of the African in America has sold us a false bill of goods with integration. Today we must acknowledge and live the truth behind the simple fact that to whom you give your money is to whom you give your power. Look at how powerful the Asians have gotten off our money. Their children are being sent to college and they are building up their homelands off the life energy that comes from unenlightend African consumption rather than the enlightened self-interest of Blackonomics.

So-called wh**e so-called people knew that if we were left to our own devices we would have a Black Wall Street in every state. Left to our own devices, Marcus Garvey's dream of a free, independent and reedemed Africa would have become a reality in short order. For that type of society to come into existence would have meant the end of Amerikkka. They knew that so well that they even made a movie about it. But from their twisted point of view, a birth of a nation cold never tell the real story of African potential. And that is why the so-called wh**e so-called people who have invaded this posting are refusing to allow this type of discourse to continue without their static. But they really can't be blamed for their behaviour...that is what happens when you are possessed by the demon of one too many European winters. Too many Africans raising each others' consciousness spells the end of world wide so-called white so-called supremacy and they see no future for themselves under those circumstances. How sad.

But as I said before, its a new day...a new millennium. The tactics and strategies that worked so well before to disrupt our progress, cooperation and collaboration doesn't work any more. Africans on a global scale are working night and day to melt down the barriers of might that 'Willie Lynch' and his descendents have built up in the hearts, heads and minds of Africans worldwide. That was how they kept us divided and conquered for so long. Soon and very soon we will see a new era ushered in by the African. But it will not be the African that is commonly recognized. This African has not yet been seen for who he is. As Gil Scott-Heron said, the revolution will not be televised. You will not see this African during the Million 'Fill-in-the-blank' March. They will not be on CNN, CSPAN, or BET. But you may look for them 'in the whirlwind or the storm'. This is the AFrican who realizes that the only person who the African can truly rely on is himself. This African does not seek any assistance from 'you-know-who'. This African recognizes that the only person who can destroy the African is the African himself. This African recognizes that the God of the Universe...The-Creator-of-All-that-is... made the universe black because God is a black God...but don't believe me...go out and look at the sky tonight...we live in a universe that has little speaks of white stuff called stars surrounded by an otherwise black universe...somebody is trying to tell something to those of us who have eyes to see and have ears to hear...heed the call Africans...Arise you Gods...

One AstroBlack GOD...One Aim...One Destiny!!!
Africa for the Africans those at home and those abroad....

Not by might
Nor by power
But by my spirit saith the lord of hosts
God of the Right
Our battles fight
be with us as of yore
Break down the barriers of might we reverently implore
Stand with us in our struggle for
The triumph of the right
and Spread confusion ever o'er
the advocates of might
and let them know
that righteousness
is mightier than sin
that might is only selfishness
and cannot
ought not
endow us lord with faith
and grace
and courage to endure
the wrongs we suffer here apace
and bless the African ever more

When we ask the same creator that freed the slaves and ended jim crowism and abolished apartheid in Azania to give us whatever we need to uplift our race at home and abroad it will be granted to us...however we must first must have the will to do whatever is necessary for that day to come

By DARK AND BORED,BY THE USUAL 'how great we are speeches,that ain't speaking to the here and now! ( - on Friday, November 17, 2000 - 07:55 pm:



By Darkoverlord ( - on Friday, November 17, 2000 - 10:43 pm:

Yeah, niggers forgot more than Europeans ever knew. Is that why Africa is and always be a basketcase? Why WE punked you niggers and not the other way around. Yeah, the usual nigger drivel! You have a dream, those ghetto niggers everywhere have the equivalent of an MBA (Ebonics of course!!) That sounds as real as Greggy and his UFO niggers waiting to help you apes everywhere!!

By White vampire ( - on Sunday, November 19, 2000 - 11:02 am:

Greg..............Piss on you, motherf>u>c.K.er!

By GREG ( - on Sunday, November 19, 2000 - 12:30 pm:




By Virtual_god (Virtual_god) ( - on Thursday, January 25, 2001 - 10:38 pm:

Could someone define integration?

Thinking about it logically, it makes sense that integration is the opposite of segragation.

Segregation meaning seperate from, integration must mean close to or in close proximity to. It can't possibly mean equal to.

If this is the case, if "integration" means in close proximity to, at what point did Black (meaning non-white) people "integrate" with White people? Integration is relative, meaning all people on the planet are both integrated and segregated at the same time.

This is a play on words and the "play" is on Black (non-white) people. When there was formal slavery, Black (non-white) people were integrated with White people, but, the slave was still a slave. At the same time Black (non-white) people were segregated from White people.

"Integration" is a trick. It will not solve the problem of Racism (White Supremacy). Neither will "Segregation".

The question is how can we equalize POWER among all people and at the same time make sure no one is mistreated and that the person that needs the most help gets the most help.

By his HRH-DARKOVERLORD RESPONDS TO VIRTUAL ( - on Friday, January 26, 2001 - 05:05 pm:

Virtual the problem with your question is intergration, like you said is really a false face,behind which whites can pretend to be liberal. What it'comes to mean is the following; all other non white people losing their identiies and becoming honorary whites. It also means that these people lose all econmic and political power in exchange for being not becoming part of the dominate ''MINORITY'',WHITES!
Under captiolism ,power will never be shared and the dumb ass crackers like the ones here will contiune their charade of being part of the socalled master race,even thought their just so much cannon folder for the white ruling class,they worship at the feet of. Whats most apparent is how easy the masses are lead into believe all the lies of white historians, even to the extent of having selfhating blacks parroting this same madness>

By Virtual_GOD@ho.com ( - on Friday, January 26, 2001 - 07:15 pm:

According to the logic, all people would rather have it easy than to have it hard.

No Black (non-white) person will ever be accepted by White people as anything other than subjects. All non-white (Black) people are subject to White Supremacy (Racism), therefore, thinking about it logically, there can be no such thing as a ""MINORITY" WHITE".

All non-white (Black) people are minorities, according to the most POWERFUL people on the planet. We are referred to as "minority" which is synonymous ith "POWERLESS". "White Supremacist" is synonymous with POWERFUL. Surely, non-white (Black) people out number White people so we're not a "minority" in numerical terms. Neither are non-white (Black) people a "minority" in terms of color deficiency.

Liberal, republican, democrat, capitolism, it doesn't matter the terminology that you use, White people are the most POWERFUL people on the planet.

It doesn't matter which socio-material SYSTEM you refer to, the dominant motivating force among the people of the known universe is White Supremacy (Racism). Therefore, nothing of significance happens among the people of the known universe that does not, directly or indirectly, involve the POWER of the White Supremacists (Racists).

"Integration" is a word that Racists (White Supremacists) use to confuse communications. While they know and understand exactly what the words mean, we function from whatever definition or description they tell us.

"Integration", to a White Supremacists (Racists), means in close proximity to. It doesn't mean anything else. But to the subject people (non-white/ Black) it can mean any number of things.

You've been living in a dream world Neo.

By Jim ( - on Friday, January 26, 2001 - 08:48 pm:

I realize that asking this question is an exercise in futility, but are you guys capable of thinking on your own? You regurgitate black racist dogma like you've had it etched on your brain. I know this is a hard and bitter pill for you to swallow, but life is not a black and white struggle. White Supremacy is not the driving motivation for white people. Some whites, like me, have a low opinion of black people based on the actions of a lot of them, but that doesn't play a part in our daily lives. It's not the basis for politics or policy. It is simply an attitude, and as people on this message board keep proving, a justified one. White supremacy is not only not "the dominating force," but it is no force whatsoever, as much as you might wish it were, or as much as you have been indoctrinated to think so.

By Virtual_GOD ( - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 12:10 pm:


Are you a White person?

By Jim ( - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 04:53 pm:


By Virtual_GOD ( - on Saturday, January 27, 2001 - 05:34 pm:


What does mostly mean?

Under a SYSTEM of White Supremacy (Racism) you are either White or you're not. You can't be part White.

I've heard some people say that they are American Indian and White at the same time. Meaning they are "Red" and "White" at the same time. This is impossible under the SYSTEM of White Supremacy (Racism). White is a political term not a genetic term, because how White is White?

For example, some people are classified as "Black" but there is no evidence in the structure of their DNA that says they're "Black". I'm classified as "Black" but my skin color is brown, my skin color is not black.

So again, what do you mean "mostly"?

By DARKOVERLORD ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 01:24 am:


By Jim ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 06:11 am:

Mostly means mostly. I'm 1/2 French, 1/4 German and 1/4 Japanese, with probably some English and/or Dutch scattered around in there somewhere, therefore mostly white. And please don't buy into this black racist insanity about a "system of white supremacy." There is no such system, and obviously one can be mostly or partly white, or mostly or partly black, or mostly or partly Tadjik, or any of a number of combinations. You're right, though, about there being no tag in DNA which identifies someone as belonging to this or that racial group. If you classify yourself as black it is probably because your ancestry is mostly black. It's no big deal.

By Jim ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 08:55 am:

Continuing to Virtual:

You referred to the "system of white supremacy," and I pointed out that there is no such system. There isn't, but what you should consider whenever someone tosses out some deliberately incendiary phrase such as that what the motivation behind it is. Far from being a "system of white supremacy," this country is a moedl of racial and cultural tolerance. If there is a more racially, ethnically, religiously or culturally diverse and at the same time tolerant society on earth, I defy you or anyone else to name it. Yet some insist on falsely labeling this most tolerant of societies as "white supremacy." Why? The answer is simple: racism. Not on the part of those who are falsely accused, but on the parts of those who make the false accusation. Some people hate white people, and to get others to share their hatred they coin phrases such as this supposed "system of white supremacy." You should question things like that as soon as you hear them. You should suspect the motives of those who make that claim rather than taking them at face value.

By Virtual_GOD ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 09:07 am:


I now understand your position, it is not logical but I understand it.

I do not classify myself as Black (non-white). The most POWERFUL people on the planet, White people, classify all other people. The only time people are allowed to classify themselves is when it introduces even more confusion. When this is done it can be said that the people who have classified themselves has done so with the help or aid of the White Supremacists (Racists), directly or indirectly , that is, as long as the classification introduces confusion.

I have other questions if you don't mind.

Do you function as White in America?

When don't you function as White in America?

When do you function as Japanese?

Do Japanese people accept you as Japanese?

Other than Japanese, all of the other groups of people you named are classified, by White people, as being members of the "White" "Race".

By Jim ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 09:45 am:

My position was entirely logical, but you are free to disagree with it. Also, it is you who classifies yourself as black. You just did. You also classify white people as white. There are different races of people, so please don't try to pass off those differences as the whim of white people when you yourself and everyone else does exactly the same thing.

In answer to your questions:
"Do you function as White in America?"
No, I function as a human in America, exactly like you do.

"When don't you function as White in America?"
I don't function as "white" in America, any more or less than you do. I function as a human. I do human things, like everyone else. White, black, Asian, Native American, it makes no difference.

"When do you function as Japanese?"
I don't, any more than I function as white. I function only as me, a unique human individual acting in much the same manner as everyone else who draws breath in this society.

"Do Japanese people accept me as Japanese?"
No. I'm American. I don't speak Japanese, don't look very Japanese, and generally have very little interaction with Japanese people except for the occaissional family reunion. The greater part of my ancestry is French, and I'm not accepted as French, either, but as the American that I am, just as you would be treated as an American if you were to go to Africa or otherwise find yourself in the company of Africans.

And, yes, other than the Japanese part, the rest of my ancestry is classified by white people, by you, and the rest of humanity, as "white" or "Caucasian."




By Virtual_GOD ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 09:31 pm:


I do not classify anyone. I do not have the POWER to classify anyone. White people are the most POWERFUL people on the planet. They are the classifiers.

Here are a few questions that will determine whether or not you function as White in America. Please take the time to read and answer them. If you answer "White" to any of them you may be "White".

When you filled out your Census form did you put "American" or White for your "Race"?

On your birth certificate, does it say "American" or White for your "Race"?

On your school records does it say "American" or White for your "Race"?

You see, I am a victim of classification. Everyone who looks like me is a VICTIM of classification. No non-white (Black) person has the POWER to "enforce" classifications. Only White people have the POWER to enforce classifications.

If you still are not sure if you're White, send me a photo of you and I'll ask some White people I know who say they're "Racists" if you qualify to be White. My e-mail address is Virtual_GOD@netnoir.net.

By Jim ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 10:10 pm:

White people are not a monolith, acting as one, imposing their collective will upon others. You are as powerful, or powerless to "classify" someone as any white person is, and what you're referring to as a classification is simply language. We have different names for different races of people. Everyone else does, too. The Egyptians did. The Chinese and Japanese do. By claiming that you are somehow exempt from a common language usage because either you're black or because you're only one person is simply playing word games. You presumably call a tree a tree or a car a car, in exactly the same manner a white person would, and in exactly the same way you call a white person a white person or a black person a black person.

I don't remember the phrasing, whether it was "white" or "Caucasian," but because I'm mostly Caucasian, that's what I would have put down. Same for my school record, driver's license, and anything else that asks for a description of one's race.

Again, you're playing word games with the word "power." Using simple phraseology to describe something, a person's race, a tree, a car, a rock, is not "enforcing" anything. It is describing, and you describe white and black people the same way whites do it, so there is nothing unique to them or exclusionary about you.

By Virtual_GOD ( - on Sunday, January 28, 2001 - 10:52 pm:


All that to say you are "Caucasian", interesting.

What is the difference between "White" and "Caucasian"?

By Jim ( - on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 09:54 am:

There isn't much difference between "white" and "Caucasian." Caucasians encompass a very diverse group of people, including Semites / Arabs, most Asian Indians and others. "White" generally refers to people of northern European extraction, but the difference is just the colloquial use of the speech.

In any event, and no matter how you cut it, you're arguing over language. You are calling it "classifying" if someone uses language merely to describe something and are falsely ascribing that as being something only white people have the opportunity to do. You and I were both born into an English speaking nation. Neither you nor I "classified" what a tree is, what a rock is, what a cow is, what a male is, or what a female is, yet we use those words to describe the thing in question. There is no difference between that and using "black" or "white" to describe different races of people, or "Negroid" or "Caucasian." It is simply the language, nothing more, nothing less, and there is no difference between you and any white person, Asian or Eskimo in that regard.

By Jim ( - on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 11:05 am:

Questions to Virtual:
What do you think the significance is of using words to describe something such as "black" or "white?" How is that any different from describing "male" or "female?" If it bothers you when white people use such terminology, does it bother you when other groups / races / nationalities do it as well?


Virtual what do you think you'll get from a racist ,a straight honest answer? Remember this slug your talking to has been programed to repeat and repeat all the lies and half truths its spewing. Remember this the definition of stupid is doing the same thing over and over and expecting something different to happen. Talking to earthworm jim or the other bottom feeding slugs,is just that! These pimple on the ass of progress will never admit the truth,not even if they knew it! Your attempts at making him reveal what he can never do are futile,even you must be able to see that. Like all spin doctors of white racism,ya can drag this maggot to the well of knownledge but don't think he'll drink the water. This vermen, like the rest of his kind,only thrives on lies and myths that they can never support. The use of language is a waste cuz he'll always come back with more reasons why this word now means something other then when you used it. He will always contiune to hide behind generalites,and obtuse so called reasoning. IT is here for one reason only D-I-S-N-F-O-R-M-A-T-I-O-N !

By Jim ( - on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 01:15 pm:

As you probably know, giving you momentary credit for having the mental capacity to know anything at all, the opposite of what you say is true. You guys are the ones who reject truth and who insist on regurgitating a line of propaganda that was spoon-fed to you; please don't transfer your failings on to others.

By Virtual_GOD ( - on Monday, January 29, 2001 - 08:23 pm:


If there is no difference between White and Caucasian why won't you say you're White? You say that you're Caucasian but not White. Then you say there's no difference between the two.

I am not responsible for the creation, maintenance or refinement of the English language and yet you say I have the POWER to enforce meaning of words on the masses of the people who speak the English language. How can I accomplish this "enforcement"?

I'm sure there must be some significance to coining words and adding them to the "National Language" but I am not responsible for these tasks, therfore I cannot answer that question. You are White, can you tell me why White people classify all people on the basis of color and why is it important to do so?

It doesn't bother me at all. I'm interested in why White people classify themselves based on color and why they find it important to do so. Can you answer these questions for me?

No Black (non-white) person has the ability (POWER) to classify White people.

By Jim ( - on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 10:28 am:

I didn't say I'm Caucasian but not white, and in any event I articulated for you the difference in terminology of "white" versus "Caucasian." They are virtually the same thing, but "white" generally refers to lighter complected people from Europe, even though Caucasians include people who are not necessarily fair-haired or fair skinned such as Arabs, Semites and others.

You have exactly the same POWER to enforce language that I or any other person in this society has -- none whatsoever. That's the point. You simply use language the way the rest of humanity uses it.

And you're dodging the question about the significance of using the words "black" or "white." You seem intent on contriving some kind of significance for it, yet you can't begin to define or describe that alleged significance. That's probably because there is no such significance. You're falsely suggesting that only white people classify people on the basis of color and you know that not to be true. When you describe someone as black or white, yellow, Asian, brown, whatever else, you are doing exactly the same thing. Exactly. I don't know the Yoruba language, or any other African language, but it's safe to assume they have different words for different races of people, yet you seem to find significance only when the ever-hated white people do it.

Again, it is demonstrably false to assert that only white people use words to describe different races of people, and it is fraudulent to ascribe an "importance" that is not there. It is also patently false to claim that blacks do not do exactly as whites do when they use words such as "black" or "white" to describe black or white people.

By Jim ( - on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 12:57 pm:

One last exercise in futility:

I just looked up the Swahili (the only on-line dictionary for any African dictionary that I could find) for black man and white man. The words are mzungu for white man, and gozi for black man. Since you seem obsessed with the notion that there is something significant about white people using words to describe something, please tell me what you think the significance is of Africans "classifying" black people "gozi" and white people "mzungu" and, again, please articulate how that differs, whether in their case or in our case, from calling a tree a tree, a woman a woman, or a car a car.
Thank you.

By DARKOVERLORD ( - on Tuesday, January 30, 2001 - 09:26 pm:


By Virtual_GOD ( - on Wednesday, January 31, 2001 - 11:30 pm:


Who made the "English" language? White people?

When refinement of the "English" language needs to happen who refines it? White people?

You make the association of using words with the creation and refinement of language. Another attempt to confuse meaning for non-white (Black) people.

As I've stated before, I do not know what the "significance" is as it is applied to the classification of people by color. I do not classify people by color so how could I know? White people classify people by color. This is the reason I asked you why do White people classify people by color and why is it important for White people to do so? A question you still have not answered.

What is the Swahili translation for Racism (White Supremacy)? There isn't one. Do you know why? The Swahili language is largely influenced by White people and White people do not want the truth revealed that "Racism" and "White Supremacy" are the same thing.

Why do you classify yourself by color?

Why is it important for you to do so?

By DARKOVERLORD ( - on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 05:33 am:


By Jim ( - on Thursday, February 1, 2001 - 09:56 am:

We live in a society that consists predominantly of white people and which is an extension of a European society that was almost exclusively white people. So, obviously, white people invented the language, just as Chinese people invnted their language and black Africans created their language.

And what you keep misstating is that there is a "significance" associated with using words. You are truly obsessed with the fact that in English there are words for black people and white people, just as there are in languages created by other races of people, and you keep misstating that as "classifying" people. Moreover, in the English language, one could use the word "person" or "man" to describe someone, yet YOU continue to use the words "black" and "white," doing EXACTLY what you falsely assign as being something only white people can do.

I don't know, and I doubt that you do either, whether or not Swahili has a word for racism. One thing that is patently untrue is your statement that white people (your "classification" again, as ever, as always, incessantly) are responsible for that omission, if there is such an omission, because, in your fantasy, you believe that they don't want "white supremacy" to be considered "racism." Virtual, everyone in this country knows that white supremacy is a form of racism. Black supremacy is also a form of racism, as is the simple slander of white people that you engage in. Any person, any group can be racist, and in 21st century America, many black Americans have made an art out of it.

I don't "classify" myself by color. I am simply what would be considered "white" by appearance, as you would be considered "black" by appearance, and those are simply descriptive adjectives about appearance. It is patently dishonest to read anything more into that than there is, and it is patently dishonest to falsly assign a "significance" to it that exists in your mind, not in the reality of the situation.

When is this going to sink in? When will you stop "classifying" yourself as "black?"

By Virtual_GOD ( - on Saturday, March 3, 2001 - 11:37 am:

In reading the initial statement by Thomas Jackson and the posts by the White people here who claim to be "racists" and White people here who do not claim to be "racists" I've come the conclusion that a "racist" is a White person.

This makes sense in terms of what "race" is. It seems to be an organization of White people. Whatever this organization practices is "racism".
The same as if there were an organization of green people called "cace". Whatever the green people practiced would be called "cacism". The practice of the organization of NAACP is NAACPism or WCC is WCCism or Urban League would be Urban Leagueism, etc.

Any other organization within the "race" organization is a sub-organization if its goals, objectives and purpose for existence are not the same as that of the "race" organization.

The question begs, what are White people organized towards, in other words, what are their objectives and what is their purpose for being organized?

I've often wondered, when I see White people killing each other or fighting each other or arguing with each other, why they do this. If all White people are supposed to be "an "organization", why does this occur? It seems that even if White people rob each other, fight with each other or kill each other there is one thing they shake hands on, all over the world, not to allow any non-white people to gain any measurable power.

It also seems that the reason for the conflict between White people is only for two reasons;

1) Struggling to find the best (more refined) way to practice "racism".

2) Angry because they didn't get their fair share of subject people (non-white people).

I had to ask myself, if this is true, if it is true that "racism" is whatever is practiced by this organization called "race" and the only people who belong to this organization called "race" is White people, what exactly do they practice and why do they practice what they practice.

This thinking is of course not in accordance with the traditional think on "racism", which assumes anyone can be a "racists". I think people have confused "racism" with prejudice and confused "racism" with bigotry and confused "racism" with discrimination. I think this was done as a result of people looking at the practices of the people (White) who belong to the "race" organization and associating those practices with the word "racism. Also with associating the thinking that all people belong to a "race", which is inaccurate, people began to think that all people could be "racist".

This is very difficult for some people to grasp because of the level of confusion that they are already involved in. Any person can be discriminatory or prejudiced or a bigot but non-white people cannot be "racist" or practice "racism" simply because they do not belong to "race", which is an organization of White people.

Non-white people are part of a "racial category", which is a category that has been identified and classified by a person or people that belong to the organization called "race". Using the afore mentioned example with green people, it would be called "cacial category".

In order for the organization of "race" to pull this off they would have to be very powerful. I had to ask myself, who are the most powerful people on the planet? The answer is White people.

No non-white person sends an object into outer space without asking White people. No non-white person tests atomic bombs, on their own soil, without asking White people. No non-white person buys or sells mass quantities of weapons capable of killing massive amounts of people without asking White people.

White people are surely the most powerful people on the planet. I think this is what "supremacy" means. When White people refer to themselves as White Supremacists, they are talking about White people who practice "supreme" power, not genetic power. No White person is genetically more powerful than a non-white person. When a White person says "minority" they mean a person or persons who practice "minority" power, which does not even compare to "supreme" power. Others call the power White people exercise "superior" power, and the power non-white people exercise "inferior" power.

This is the "minority" that White people are fighting not to become a part of. White people don't want "minority" power. They are not talking about genetics, in terms of being a "minority". Genetically, White people are already the "minority"; they are genetic recessive, which means the ability to produce color is genetically dominant over the inability to produce it.

So here we have it, White people are the only people who belong to the organization called "race", therefore the only "racists" and White people are the most powerful people on the planet.

I’m still puzzled as to why White people practice “racism”, which seems to be an effort to control all non-white people and has been defined as “the totality of the involvement of what White people do”, by some White people.

Some have said that what White people are organized for (“race”) is survival. They have said that what the organization of “race” is all about is the survival of White people who are disappearing faster than non-white people. I’m not sure if this is true and pose the question to White people.

This is not a question of what is “race”. I know what “race” is. This is not a question of what is “racism”. I know what “racism” is. This is not a question of are White people the most powerful people on the planet. I know White people are the most powerful people on the planet.

The question is simple, Why do White people practice Racism (White Supremacy)?

By Rasheed Johnson ( - on Sunday, March 4, 2001 - 10:49 am:

It's seems that somewhere in all of this mess everyone has missed the original question at hand by my man martin. Did Integration help or hinder black people? Let's get back to it. I have been browsing this site and reading and researching the themes of the topics and dicussions and reading these discussions chronologically it is evident to me that most consistantly stray from the original question at hand, and begin to express there on feelings of hatred and biased opinions completely unrelated to the orginal topic. Speak your mind, but do so within the realm of the topic.

By Martin ( - on Friday, March 9, 2001 - 05:35 pm:

Thank You Rasheed

By Martin ( - on Friday, March 23, 2001 - 04:50 am:

"There is no Such thing as intergration...just

One of the best arguements against integration
is that when black people integrate in mass, white
people move out. Defeating the purpose of
intergration all together. But they do accept us
in small portions. They do this in order to say
"look we're not racist."

The token is used and set up on a pedestol to
prove that racism no longer exists. So the token,
after benifitting from a life of comfort, is
largely disassociated from the black mass and is
not fully understanding of whats goin on. This is
basically the house hand field hand relationship.

The result is that the black masses slip back
into economic poverty with less sense of community
while the lucky few tokens are allowed in. So to a
point, worse off than we were before.

(We have come to far to no longer exist. We are a
people, we are a culture, we are a community THAT
All of our art forms, all of our history, all
of our struggles should be culturally recognized
and respected for BLACK PEOPLE!!! You may take
part in our art forms but you d*mn well better
remember where you got them from!!)---my 2 cents

This is not the "slow change" suggested by King,
this is cultural and racial self destruction. Or
"assimalation" as Tokens like to call it.

By Virtual_GOD ( - on Tuesday, April 24, 2001 - 11:03 pm:

Could someone define integration?

Thinking about it logically, it makes sense that integration is the opposite of segragation.

Segregation meaning seperate from, integration must mean close to or in close proximity to. It can't possibly mean equal to.

If this is the case, if "integration" means in close proximity to, at what point did Black (meaning non-white) people "integrate" with White people? Integration is relative, meaning all people on the planet are both integrated and segregated at the same time.

This is a play on words and the "play" is on Black (non-white) people. When there was formal slavery, Black (non-white) people were integrated with White people, but, the slave was still a slave. At the same time Black (non-white) people were segregated from White people.

"Integration" is a trick. It will not solve the problem of Racism (White Supremacy). Neither will "Segregation".

The question is how can we equalize POWER among all people and at the same time make sure no one is mistreated and that the person that needs the most help gets the most help.

Add a Message

This is a public posting area. If you do not have an account, enter your full name into the "Username" box and leave the "Password" box empty. Your e-mail address is optional.