Racism is not Patriotism

    Newer Older

    patantattoo, lilybee_2000, and 4 other people added this photo to their favorites.

    1. bagelcurry 106 months ago | reply

      Please, if anyone knows how to get in touch with the photographer, I would like to use this photo for a book cover on racism. I have tried his/her flickr mail but there is no reply. It is quite urgent. Thanks!
      Please write to me at mail@alanalentin.net

    2. Lips Mahony 88 months ago | reply

      Vanity: (n) The quality or condition of being vain. Excessive pride in one's appearance or accomplishments; conceit.

      Race is a vanity. Stop identifying by racial characteristics and learn the true measure of your worth as a unique INDIVIDUAL.

    3. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      Why is it "ridiculous"?

    4. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      Joel, forgive me, but are you accustom to placing constraints on the dialogue of others and then accusing them of being “stifling”?

      There’s some irony to be found there.

      For starters, saying my assertion is “ridiculous” is simply not a critical argument; its ridicule at the very least, and off-putting to anyone that might want to take your response sincerely. Telling me I can’t use the concept of individuality when defining the worth of race –without explaining why-- is arbitrary and dictatorial. And similarly, placing the pre-condition of perfection before allowing a judgment on the merit of race is equally dictating.

      I’d honestly like to know your thoughts on the matter, but please don’t take the license of telling me what I can and cannot argue with, particularly when A.) you have no authority to set such parameters in such a debate, and B.) you don’t bother to justify why. It’s rather uncivil.

      So, again, perhaps you can explain WHY it is that until all things are supposedly fair and perfect would then race be a vanity? What is it exactly about your precondition of a perfect society that makes my judgements on race unallowable?

    5. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      “Uh, I think above you did what you just accused me of.”

      I did not. It was a rhetorical statement for anyone reading this thread to agree with or disagree.

      Joel, I think you’re confusing two distinctly different things here. The first being what I originally posted, which is the notion of defining one’s self worth by criteria other than something as superficial as race or skin color. My notion of what makes up an individual’s identity, based on the freewill of the individual, has nothing whatsoever to do with justifying historical or current discrimination by others based on racism. How you extract from that an “oversimplification of a serious issue”, and more amazingly, see a “placing of blame on the oppressed” in my writing, is absolutely beyond me.

      If you would be so considerate, perhaps you can point that line out for me, the one where I place “blame on the oppressed”? And while you’re at it, and to help me understand better your thought process, maybe you can explain to me what idea or principle you believe our rights as citizens under the constitution to be based on?

    6. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      Joel, I didn’t say that you were “confused”, what I said was “you’re confusing two distinctly different things”. The first (saying you're "confused") is an insult, which is not what I wrote at all, yet this seems to be the way you’ve deliberately interpreted it. Whereas the second of the two is a valid point of debate, which, instead of picking up and running with, thereby progressing the conversation in good faith, you’ve unfortunately chosen to snub.

      “I am not going to continue a discussion with someone who only says that I am confused then asks for further confused commentary.”

      This is simply not the case. Anyone can re-read my post and see that I don’t "only" ask for more commentary, I go on to further clarify myself for your benefit (and for the benefit of anyone still reading this initially promising but now siderailed discussion). Here it is again:

      “The first being what I originally posted, which is the notion of defining one’s self worth by criteria other than something as superficial as race or skin color. My notion of what makes up an individual’s identity, based on the freewill of the individual, has nothing whatsoever to do with justifying historical or current discrimination by others based on racism.”

      Your painting of me as somehow being oppressive towards minorities, stifling of conversation, and now the charge of being overly demanding, without any give in the give and take in a discussion, is rather dishonest. I have no explanation as to why you have taken a hostile position towards me by misrepresenting multiple times what I’ve written.

      All I have invited here is honest and civil debate about ideas. Why you haven’t fully taken me up on that is probably only an answer you can give yourself.

    7. JohnnyNoNoNosir 83 months ago | reply

      This conversation has been instructive. I thank you both for the display.

      It appears to be a classic case of one individual who takes the position of positing the natural rights philosophy of the Enlightenment. www.fact-index.com/h/hu/human_rights.html
      .... as a countering philosophy to the grievance culture/identity politics of another, who dogmatically and quite dishonestly refuses to engage the questions regarding an ideological vision that gives no justification to support the fundamental principles of its vision. It's as if the vision of " the white male ruling class" is so total, so unassailable that it's a religion unto itself.

      It's all so familiar .... www.fact-index.com/m/ma/marxism.html or, if you like.... www.fact-index.com/l/li/libertarian_socialism.html

      I'm impressed by the thoroughness of Mr. Mahony's dialectic, though Mr. Cook has some growing up to do if he thinks that his commentary here is anything less than a stage show surrogate for honest inquiry.

    8. JohnnyNoNoNosir 83 months ago | reply

      Something tells me it's going to be long and fruitless wait for a substantive response from Mr. Cook.

    9. JohnnyNoNoNosir 83 months ago | reply

      "And yes the "white male ruling class" is real, and it is a religion, a dogma if you will."

      I may have poorly articulated previously, the statement that "the grievance culture/identity politics of another, who dogmatically and quite dishonestly refuses to engage the questions regarding an ideological vision that gives no justification to support the fundamental principles of its vision. It's as if the vision of " the white male ruling class" is so total, so unassailable that it's a religion unto itself. "

      What was meant by that last sentence, is to say that those whose vision of history is formed by this constraining view which privileges gender, class and race are among those who hold this ideological view as to be that which is unassailable, ... a religion if you will.

      My apologies for the unskillful articulation of this point.

      In any case, should you find yourself espousing such a view, as Mr. Cook does here you're likely to find yourself in the ideological company of Howard Zinn, Charles Beard and the like, who've tried to reduce the past to some Manichean fable.

      But of course, this is all just my display of an inability to resist accepting my role as being part of the colossal "white male ruling class" whose job it is to provide an "oppressor" role for the revolutionary Mr. Cook to rage against.

      There can be no other possibility. For if one exists, it must be "ridiculous".

    10. JohnnyNoNoNosir 83 months ago | reply

      "it seems a little coincidental that Lips responses get small and you come on the scene with the same ideas and reinforcing his ideas. "

      All just part of the white male power structure's continued conspiracy.

    11. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      While watching this video, remember to pick sides in this fight.... according to what criteria?

      cbs2.com/local/Fight.South.LA.2.720562.html

      Race, of course. Joel says that who we are doesn’t come from someplace inside; rather it’s created environmentally by others (that’s clearly the case for him ideologically). Race determines the role we as individuals play in society, and anything else is ignorance, so the answer is race.

      I'm puttin' my money on the Hispanics even though according to Marx that would represent false consciousness on my part by voting outside my class interests. That’s alright. I'm only really doing it to see if I can get them to assimilate to our side and serve our interests, turning them into house Negros to secure my white privilege.

      Don't want to make it too white though. Has anyone rounded up the albinos yet? Have we established what their unique class interest is? Is it promoting colder climates? And which oppressing class taught them this interest?

      And then, don't fool yourselves. It’s the lesbians and the Muslims next. Don’t believe me? Just watch! After all, I’m a member of the mighty and vaunted Patriarchy!

    12. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      Man, whitey sure has these two sellouts in a knuckle by getting them to blame the victims:

      www.liveleak.com/view?i=fde_1209130206

      Score one for THE MAN!

    13. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      No no, you just don’t get it. It’s not just that Bill Cosby is somehow insulated from poverty and out of touch with what causes it. No, it’s bigger than that. Bill Cosby has employment as an entertainer and speaker and enjoys a certain privileged standard of living ONLY because whites allow him to. And his privileged lifestyle is dependent on towing the “blame the victim” line (using the oppressors own code-words, like “self-responsibility” and “family values”) that so suits the social and economic interests of whites.

      Bill Cosby isn’t just misguided, he’s an Uncle Tom.

    14. Lips Mahony 83 months ago | reply

      Yo, hittin' the erase button ain't speakin' truth to power, you know what I'm sayin'?

    keyboard shortcuts: previous photo next photo L view in light box F favorite < scroll film strip left > scroll film strip right ? show all shortcuts