Tuesday, September 29, 2009

#5. Classical Music


Madonna implores us, “music makes the people come together.” Yeah.

Black people love music. Love it. Black people love music so much that when you travel on a monorail system in any major city (Chicago, Atlanta, Washington DC, New York City, etc.) they gladly share the song their listening to with the entire train.

Throughout history, as the various races that populate the globe matured and evolved to their various forms today, music proved an integral tool in connecting the generations and more importantly, in ensuring that traditions and customs would pass on from one line to the next.

In Africa, the ancestral homeland of all people on the planet, music is vital part of life and delivers untold joy and happiness to all in earshot, thanks largely to most important instrument that acts as the foundation of all African music, the drum:

“African musical instruments include a wide array of drums, slit gongs, rattles, double bells as well as melodic instruments like string instruments, (musical bows, different types of harps and harp-like instruments like the Kora as well as fiddles), many types of xylophone and lamellophone such as the mbira and different types of wind instrument like flutes and trumpets.

Drums used in African traditional music include tama talking drums, bougarabou and djembe in West Africa, water drums in Central and West Africa, and the different types of ngoma drums (or engoma) in Central and Southern Africa. Other percussion instruments include many rattles and shakers, such as the kosika, rainstick, bells and woodsticks.”

Black people in America love music. Jazz, Blues and especially Rap are forms of music that tell dual story of both misery and triumph for Black people. Rap music, besides the the lyrics supplied by Black people, owes its existence to the technology supplied by Rober Moog and his invention of the synthesizer, as that electronic musical device brings us modern rap:

"Beats are traditionally generated from portions of other songs by a DJ, or sampled from portions of other songs by a producer, though synthesizers, drum machines, and live bands are also used, especially in newer music."

Black people believe that rap music is finest form of music ever created, the culmination of all of mankind's musical evolution into the finest self-expressive format ever.

The meshing of traditional African instruments with technology has birthed a form of music that will enshrine the culmination of Black peoples influence, as in 2009 Black people have achieved the apex of their dominion of the world.

And yet, a form of music leaves Black people squeamish and is strangely absent from their Ipods, and this genre of music has even been used to repeal criminals from stores:

"For years, the drunks and drug dealers and hookers who hang out at Hartford's Barnard Park have been all but oblivious to the city's efforts to get them to leave. But now the people who live and work nearby are turning to a new weapon in their effort to reclaim the park.

Classical music.

A small band of neighbors is working with the police department to enlist Beethoven, Brahms and Vivaldi in their campaign to clean up one of the city's most notoriously abused public spaces.

"We want the criminals to know we are serious about taking back this park," said neighborhood activist Carol Coburn, who came up with the idea after reading about similar efforts in West Palm Beach, Fla., as well as cities in Canada and Australia."

This interesting crime fighting mechanism, classical music, has been proven to effective in cities all across the world:

"In the past, crowds of up to 25 people would hang out in the lot, which became the site of drug dealing, fights and police responses, according to Patrick Senn, store director at Saar's Market Place.

"But now, people just come and go," said Donna Fischer, a cashier at the store.

The market started using classical music about three years ago to repel loiterers and vandals from their buildings. Senn said the method appears to be working. Since he began playing the music, Senn said he hasn't called police to the lot as much, although the Seattle Police Department wasn't able to confirm that.

Businesses and transportation systems use classical, opera and country music as a crime-fighting tool around the globe.

Several Canadian cities began pumping classical and opera music from speakers in public places, such as subway platforms, to keep people from loitering. London plays classical music in 65 of its Underground stations, drawing compliments from some commuters and transit workers, according to a Transport for London spokeswoman.

...The reason certain types of music work as a crime deterrent, neurologists say, may lie in people's neurobiological responses to things they don't enjoy or find unfamiliar. Production of dopamine, a neurotransmitter linked to pleasure and rewards, is modulated by the nucleus accumbens, one of the brain's "pleasure centers."

When people hear music that they like, that stimulates dopamine production and puts them in a better mood. But when people dislike the music, their brains respond by suppressing dopamine production — souring their mood and making them avoid the music."

Classical music, the crime fighting tool that is centuries old and produced solely by dead white males, strangely is poison to Black people:

"Classical music is a broad term that usually refers to mainstream music produced in, or rooted in the traditions of Western liturgical and secular music, encompassing a broad period from roughly the 9th century to present times. The central norms of this tradition became codified between 1550 and 1900, which is known as the common practice period.

European music is largely distinguished from many other non-European and popular musical forms by its system of staff notation, in use since about the 16th century. Western staff notation is used by composers to prescribe to the performer the pitch, speed, meter, individual rhythms and exact execution of a piece of music. This leaves less room for practices, such as improvisation and ad libitum ornamentation, that are frequently heard in non-European art music."

Names like Beethoven, Wagner and Tchaikovsky send shivers down Black people's spines, like nails on a chalkboard.

Why is it that Black people find classical music so abominable and unpleasant to the ears? The harmony of the many instruments working together perfectly under the skillful guidance of a conductor, or perhaps the pageantry that surrounds a formal orchestra and a concert?

Could it be a more sinister answer? James Baldwin, a famous literary figure because he was Black writer, said this, which sums up the not inconsiderable hatred Black people have for classical music:

“I know . . . that the most crucial time in my own development came when I was forced to recognize that I was a kind of bastard of the West; when I followed the line of my past I did not find myself in Europe but in Africa. And this meant that in some subtle way, in a really profound way, I brought to Shakespeare, Bach, Rembrandt, to the stones of Paris, to the cathedral at Chartres, and to the Empire State Building, a special attitude. These were not really my creations, they did not contain my history . . . I was an interloper; this was not my heritage.”


Movies in the United States have long been enhanced by beautiful musical scores from modern composers like James Horner, John Williams, Hans Zimmer and Howard Shore. It is this brilliant music that connects white people to the vast historical legacy they have inherited, but refuse to acknowledge.

Black people refuse to acknowledge any portion of classical music, to the jubilation of store owners everywhere whom play Chopin with increasing regularity.

Music is what bind us all to the past, a clear mark of refinement that goes far beyond culture, for it is an extension of the racial soul, and Black people have found their racial soul primarily through the medium of the drum. Stuff Black People Don't Like though, is classical music, for James Baldwin summed up the reason in exact detail.



63 comments:

CatOnARoof said...

I wonder whether B. Hussein O. copied James Baldwin when he (or Ayers) wrote in his book "Dreams of My Father" regarding a post-college trip to Europe, "By the end of the first week or so, I realized that I'd made a mistake. It wasn't that Europe wasn't beautiful; everything was just as I'd imagined it. IT JUST WASN'T MINE." (Caps are mine.) Indeed, classical music, also, is not HIS, nor any black
persons.

Anonymous said...

They might not like classical music but they LOVE claiming Mozart as their own.
In the future, if MARs becomes a memory, blacks will also claim all of white historical figures as their own and paint them with black faces.

Anonymous said...

http://www.zimbio.com/Black+Classical+Composers+and+Musicians

http://chevalierdesaintgeorges.homestead.com/

http://astro.temple.edu/~rgreene/BlackComp/

http://www.blackclassics.co.uk/aboutblackclassics.htm

Anonymous said...

additionally, the article you linked makes no mention of any specific race. it shows a picture of a black woman, so they must be talking about all black people right? right...

Iranian For Aryans said...

Very true! However, in all fairness, let it be stated that there have been some negresses who have been great singers: Shirely Verrett, Grace Bumbry, and Leontyne Price, come to mind.

Anonymous said...

so you all only read what fits in with your white washed vision of the world. how very convenient.

it must be sad to feel so threatened, at all times, by such trivial things as "black people trying to claim mozart"

pathetic.

do you all only listen to music "your race" made?

Stuff Black People Don't Like said...

To ANON,

White washed world? This article includes the ultimate quote by James Baldwin, regarding how Black people feel about Europe.

The person behind SBPDL reads any article, book, or material that they can, regardless of how it fits in with their few of the world.

I don't know what is more threatening... BLack people trying to claim Mozart, or riding with BLack people on a school bus in St. Louis, but I don't quite get your point.

THis article wasn't about only listening to music "your race" makes... it's about Black people disliking classical music. Whether it is being played to keep away petty Black criminals ALL OVER THE WORLD from stores, or it is the sheer beauty and majesty that classical music evokes, as opposed to the inglorious bastardy that the above video from "Zulu" might evoke - as it did the Amy Biehl-esuq white missionary - well, all reasons why Black people don't like classical music.

Music - the quality of or lack there of - of a certain culture is derived by a group, a people a race.

Liberals refuse to acknowledge that race exists, unless it is to prove the general racism of white people who point out unflattering patterns of behavior that Black people display in not only America, but wherever they settle.

Anonymous said...

not all black people dislike classical music.
some do. some white people do too. squirrels don't care either way. this is irrelevant. it is not a matter of black or white or even human. my mom's dog LOVES classical music. it is a matter of personal taste.

not all black people dislike europe. i know several who enjoy it very much. i know several who live in europe. so "This article includes the ultimate quote by James Baldwin, regarding how Black people feel about Europe. "
no, it is how THAT black person feels about europe. that one black person is not all black people.

the article makes NO mention of race. the author of the blog makes that assertion.

"it is the sheer beauty and majesty that classical music evokes, as opposed to the inglorious bastardy that the above video from "Zulu" might evoke - as it did the Amy Biehl-esuq white missionary - well, all reasons why Black people don't like classical music."

an attack. most attacks stem from feeling threatened.

i understand that race exists.

i am not threatened by it, hence i do not attack it.

i am not afraid of black people. hence i do not attack them

i think you all are scared out of your skulls.

and while the author may READ any and everything, he bends the information to suit his own agenda. again, the article does NOT mention race.

i understand that the article is not about listening to music "your race" makes, but the assertion seems to be that the reason this works is that black people can't stand classical music because it is not "theirs". if this is true (the author claims all statements he makes are infallable truths) then it must be that anyone of any race or culture cannot stand to listen to anything other than the music made by their own culture. is that the case? again, do you all only listen to music "your race" made?

Anonymous said...

also, look at the links above. what about those black people? or do they not count? are they covered in the whitewash of the author's oversimplifying and overarching statements and generalities?

Anonymous said...

Read the quotes from this story.

http://emergingminds.org/African-American-Conductor-Trying-to-Attract-Young-Black-People-to-Classical-Music.html



"Cargile, a 25-year-old African American who grew up in Detroit and graduated from the University Michigan with a degree in composition, has created a new orchestra from scratch. The Psalm: 150 Symphony gave its inaugural concerts Saturday and Sunday at Wayne State University.

Cargile, a spiritual man, named his group for the 150th Psalm because it speaks of praising God through trumpets, stringed instruments, flutes and crashing cymbals. But it also provides a metaphor for his evangelical zeal for promoting classical music to his peers and preaching the gospel of contemporary music.

""Unfortunately, there's some truth to the statement that a lot of young people and young African Americans are not interested in classical music,"" he said.

Anonymous said...

Black people dont like country music either, are their any links that prove they do!

Porter said...

"i am not afraid of black people. hence i do not attack them"

I love this quote from your 11:41am antagonist. Given the statistics on inter-racial violent crime I hardly think that blacks are quaking in fear of him attacking them. No, it is the epidemic of them attacking us which is the issue.

And if he is so fearless, I encourage him to stroll through the beautiful tree-lined boulevards of Kinshasa or Port-au-Prince...or hell, why be exotic? Detroit or East St. Louis will do just as well. Hopefully he'll be able to display his lack of fear by not attacking the local denizens...whether or not they reciprocate is another matter altogether.

Just as an aside...I knew a guy in college who got lost and stopped in a wonderfully "diverse" section of a large city to ask directions. He was shot in the chest for this insolence and died in the car while trying to reach a hospital.

Thank God for his devasted family he didn't believe all of those lying stereotypes about violent blacks.

Anonymous said...

black people invented the banjo. how's that for country. and again, i know personally (as in i converse and interact in a direct fashion with) black people who DO like country music. so, another blanket statement shot down.

but, just to further drive the point home, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0KHWcUItnwA

holy crap! black people! singing country! and there are black people in the crowd! no folks, that is not video editing wizardry, that's real life. give it a try some time.

and dear porter, i did not mean attack in the literal sense there smart guy.

i have walked around detroit and east st. louis. as well as lower vine in cincinatti, and seedier parts of little rock and nashville, all of which have a large african american population. i understand that there are portions of each of those cities that as a white person i am simply am not welcome. those people who would harm me based solely on my skin color are just as messed up as the rednecks who work to insure their neighborhoods remain as white and pure as the blessed virgin's god bearing crotch. it is not because those people are black or white that they are hateful and destructive. and not to say something couldn't have happened to me in those nighborhoods, but at the same time i almost got knifed in a bar by a white man for not realizing he still laid claim to a pool table i tried to use that had been untouched for half an hour.

some people suck and do horrible crappy things.

so again, people, the lesson here is that black people are not a single entity. some do messed up things. hell, lots do. but so do lots of white people. if you are really so concerned about white people and white america why not spend some time helping dissolve the meth epidemic that is tearing white communities apart. by your logic, if a large number of white people are on meth, they must all be so you can probably just walk out your front door and start there. or how about cleansing america of serial killers? most serial killers are white (84% of American killers are caucasian. http://www.fortunecity.com/roswell/streiber/273/inf_stats.htm) so all white people must be right? or how about pedophiles? "Four data sets (the FBI’s UCR arrests, State felony court convictions, prison admissions, and the National Crime Victimization Survey) all point to a sex offender who is older than other violent offenders, generally in his early 30’s, and more likely to be white than other violent offenders." (http://www.cpiu.us/statistics-2/) most are white, so all white people must be, right? stereotypes are true right?

i know this isn't going anywhere. there is no convincing going on either side. you are not going to convince me that all black people are worthless and i am not going to convince you that they are not. this just all seems so incredibly ludicrous to me though that i simply could not pass up the opportunity to have a type to type with people who think so incredibly differently than i do. and i do not know ANYONE in my day to day life that thinks like this. seriously. not a one. and i do not think they are disingenuous and lots of them are not white. we just do not believe that being of a certain race or culture defines who you are. people are dynamic and individual things. we are concerned with making the world a better place in part by treating others with respect and kindness and (gasp!) love. i am sure that this will be reacted to with ridicule and derision but i don't care. at the end of the day i do not go to bed full of anger, hate and fear.

the world is a far more beautiful place than you try to make it.

you should give letting all that go a try.

Anonymous said...

While there are indeed exceptions, usually singers like Leontyne Price or Grace Bumbry, or trumpet players like Wynton Marsalis, you're overall correct about blacks and classical music. And isn't it ironic that the black cellist in The Soloist is mentally ill? Or does that EXPLAIN a black cellist? They do play great jazz, though, I have to admit. Still, I find it hilarious that Beethoven and Mozart are used to repel black thugs -- making classical music a kind of black kryptonite. Of course, hip-hop has the same effect on me...

Porter said...

A few points dear anon. First, the "rednecks" (your casual slur of whites) don't work to "insure" that their neighborhoods remain white. That is unless they work for All State. They might like to ensure that their neighborhoods remained white (as I would) but I doubt there is a policy available for that--if so let us know.

Though what's so odd is how evil you find this natural inclination in light of your own tolerant preening. If *you* want to live in a "vibrant" community of blacks, mexicans, or Hissing Cockroaches from Madagascar, that's fine with me. Knock yourself out--or just hang around on the street corner and let someone else do it. For myself, I would rather live among my own people in a clean, safe, and friendly environment where neighborhood children can play freely outside without any knowledge of tactical evasion maneuvers from small arms fire. If you can't comprehend this then you aren't nearly the King Solomon you fancy yourself.

Second, you apparently have convinced yourself that because two disparate events have occurred in the past, that they are equally likely to occur in the future. Here's the thing kid: The *vast* majority of white men are neither serial killers nor pederasts. It would take a supreme lunatic, or a sophomore sociology student, to believe that one would be unsafe in a white neighborhood because a white serial killer pops up every leap year in a nation of 200 million.

On the other hand, you could drop a grape soda off the roof of an inner city 365Black McDonald's and have a very good chance of it plonking the cornrows of a past or future black criminal. Here's what that pro-white right-wing rag the New York Times had to say:

"By their mid-30's, 6 in 10 black men who had dropped out of school had spent time in prison.
In the inner cities, more than half of all black men do not finish high school."
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/20/national/20blackmen.html

If over half of black males don't finish school and 60% of that number are past or present convicts....well that sounds about like 1/3 my dear friend.

Here's another handy depiction curtesy of the NYT:

http://projects.nytimes.com/crime/homicides/map?ref=nyregion&emc=eta1

Look at the instances of homicide by race of perpetrator and tell me if your keen eye can detect a pattern. See all of those blue and orange dots representing black and hispanic murderers? Since they cover the entire map I know you can. Now see all of those green dots for white killers? Hmm, no me neither.

Now if you'd like to come back on here and tell us that you would willingly live and raise your children in an environment covered in blue and orange dots where one out of every three males are criminal then you're either an idiot or a liar. I care not which.

Anonymous said...

in·sure (ĭn-shŏŏr')
v. in·sured, in·sur·ing, in·sures

v. tr.


To provide or arrange insurance for: a company that insures homeowners and businesses.

To acquire or have insurance for: insured herself against losses; insured his car for theft.


To make sure, certain, or secure.<----

compare with

ensure
–verb (used with object), -sured, -suring. 1. to secure or guarantee: This letter will ensure you a hearing.
2. to make sure or certain: measures to ensure the success of an undertaking.
3. to make secure or safe, as from harm. <--this

as for the rest.
what's the point.
have your racist fun on your little blog.
have a great life

Stuff Black People Don't Like said...

To anon above, The correct usage is ensure. Thanks for visiting the blog and sorry you find it racist. All we are trying to do here is show you that Black people support Black people at a rate is far above any racial - well, almost any racial - group on the planet. I find this trait admirable. Mein Obama has been an amazing failure as a president and Black people have a horrific unemployment rate, yet they still support THEIR president with 97 percent to 98 percent approval. The truth can be found in the HATE FACTS entry on this site. You chose to ignore these facts, at your own peril. I'm sorry, but the best way for a person to change their mind or be persuaded is when their live is at stake at cognitive dissonance is disregarded for staying alive.
Black people in South Africa live in a nation that is rotting away, under their rule. Polls show that 1/3 of Black people wish to return to Apartheid-style rule.
As America disintegrates, which it is at an alarming rate, you'll begin to understand a universal truth that Benjamin Disraeli articulated, "All is race, there is no other truth."

Anonymous said...

thanks for the grammar lesson.
do me a favor and clean this sentence up so i know what you are attempting to convey.
"I'm sorry, but the best way for a person to change their mind or be persuaded is when their live is at stake at cognitive dissonance is disregarded for staying alive. "


also, perhaps you can use you phenomenal grasp of the english lanuage to explain to me how it is that you, your blog and most of thos that comment on it do not fit the following definition.

racism
–noun 1. a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
2. a policy, system of government, etc., based upon or fostering such a doctrine; discrimination.
3. hatred or intolerance of another race or other races.

n.
1.The belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others.

2.Discrimination or prejudice based on race.

as the saying goes sir, you are a duck.

Stuff Black People Don't Like said...

This blog nor does its creator endorse racism at all, nor does it perpetuate it.

Merely, this blog acts to educate on Stuff Black People Don't Like.

The best way for a person to have THEIR mind changed is to have their live put in great peril. You live in a world much the characters in a Tom Wolfe novel inhabit. The liberal blinds you put up will come crashing down at some point.

I'm so sorry you find stereotypes racist, but Black males have the highest rates of HIV/AIDs;

Black people are lousy tippers, as any server will tell you (or LeBron James will); and a quick glance at the massive differences in White-Black achievement in scholastics (despite the trillions spent since the 1950s trying to reduce that great divide) should dispel any idea of equality.

People (white liberals) always point out how much smarter Asians are than whites, yet when this same notion is applied to whites vs. Blacks, the idea becomes racist.

Anonymous said...

i won't waste any further time trying to correct that sentence for you.

re-read the definition. you fit it.

"The belief that race accounts for differences in human character " you don't believe this and do not write about it in yor blog?

or

" belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement"

simple.

i (white liberal) never point out how much smarter than whites asians are, and it is racist to do so.

seriously man, you don't think you are racist?
or are you just afraid to admit it?

Porter said...

"as for the rest.
what's the point."

Here we have the fading sigh of a man who has been thwarted by a series of hate facts. Instead of responding intelligently, he's simply packed up his toys and gone home.

I, for one, wish he would stay. He's an earnest chap who has the potential to understand that wielding the sacred talisman of yelling "racist!" simply won't work in any logical debate.

I think he is capable of understanding that every single sub-group of humanity on the face of the planet works actively to further its own self-interest and to preserve its own culture and ethnic identity. Only in the case of whites is this considered immoral. I utterly reject this hypocrisy.

I think that whites should work to preserve their culture and highlight its unparalleled success. I take this success as self-evident simply given the overwhelming numbers of non-whites who clamber to get into every single white country--or should I say soon-to-be formerly white?

And finally, I believe that with a few more hummed bars of kumbaya, that Anon will come to this same determination.

Anonymous said...

porter.

you


are


a

racist.

your mind is closed to to the possibility of anything other than your own great whiteness.
do i have a chance to change your mind?

if not, then what is the point of me continuing?


additionally, perserving your culture is fine. denouncing anothers in order to lift your own up is cowardly, pathetic and yes, immoral. regardless of your skin color. white people have done more to destroy the cultures of others than any other living thing on this planet, soleley to insure their power is maintained. when you beat the crap out of everyone around you and take everything they have leaving them with nothing, of course they have to come to you when they are in need.

Porter said...

Poor guy. Have you honestly not gotten it yet? You've spent so much of your youth in an echo chamber you think that everyone else around you is also checking their dictionary to see if this or that is "racist." Pitiful.

And my "denouncing" of others is based on empirical evidence. That you choose to ignore these hate facts do not make them disappear.

And then, like morning follows night, you bring out the old hating whitey lines. These are, of course, de rigueur for any self-respecting white left-winger. Let's discuss...

"white people have done more to destroy the cultures of others than any other living thing on this planet".

Let me ask you, would this qualify as a racist statement according to your dictionary? It certainly sounds like one. And does your dictionary also have an entry for "hypocrisy?"

But to take your risible assertion at face value, what then is the direct implication? That whites have no valid claim to their own lives or culture? Have you even begun to ponder this?

So if, for instance, a black slaughters your family in a home invasion I do hope you'll be able to accept it with graceful equanimity. After all, white people have done more to destroy the cultures of others than any other living thing on this planet. So why on Earth should your evil loved ones be allowed to live?

And this...

"solely to insure their power is maintained."

As I mentioned earlier, there are no insurance policies available to provide such indemnification against so-called power loss. But again, I wonder...Are whites in your world to have no power over their own lives? You would certainly not dare deny blacks this fundamental right. After all, someone is going to wield power, be it political or military. But for whites, to pursue power is...what are your words again...yes, cowardly, pathetic, and immoral...yes there we are.

And quite possibly my favorite line from you yet...

"when you beat the crap out of everyone around you and take everything they have leaving them with nothing, of course they have to come to you when they are in need."

Do you mean this absurd statement to be outlandish hyperbole used for effect? Or do you actually believe what you just wrote? Here are the hate facts: Four countries account for over two thirds of all *legal* immigration into the US: Mexico, China, Phillipines, and India. Mexico, of course, provides millions more illegally. None of these immigrants are white and none have been "beaten the crap out of" in any way, shape, or form by any whites either literally or figuratively. It's almost as if your mind is completely untethered to reality.

But for clarification, if someone stated that Asians are more intelligent than whites, you would say...

"i (white liberal) never point out how much smarter than whites asians are, and it is racist to do so."

But you...white liberal...do point out a fictional world where whites are the most destructive force alive and draw millions upon millions of non-whites to their countries out of some bizarre retribution for whites having "taken everything they have."

You consider all of this to be persuasive logic?

Honestly, while it's mildy amusing to rebut such childlike foolishness, it's also a bit depressing. Because like it or not, this young man is going to grow up some day. And it is my fervent hope that he will be able to act and think at a level deeper than mere regurgitation of sophomoric slogans taught to him by tenured marxists.

One can hope.

Wanderlost said...

The anonymous poster of (most recently) "October 2, 2009 7:49 PM" has done us a great service by supplying numerous contributions that display with nearly perfect clarity the quality of liberal discourse. Here are two of the Holy Trifecta of Liberal "Argumentation."

First, we have the "ad hominem" argument - or more succinctly, an insult. In many cases, the insult "racist" is used to bully an opponent into submission. In this case, however, the quality and spirit of this insult are that of a bested elementary school tether-ball player who, face red and eyes black with the humiliation of defeat, calls his opponent a "poo-poo head." Far from changing minds, such insults are merely the least graceful way in which one can admit defeat, and paradoxically serve only to strengthen their opponents' rectitude.

The second is hypocrisy - seasoned to delicious perfection with such an astonishing dose of chutzpah as to make an intelligent and reasonable reader's jaw drop to the floor. I am not speaking merely of correcting the grammar within the blog while continually committing one grammatical error after another. No, that would not be nearly so delicious.

This poster opened a series of froth-specked philippics by correcting the misuse of "insure." Hit the mute button; the Symphony of Hypocrisy is about to reach a deafening crescendo.

"white people have done more to destroy the cultures of others than any other living thing on this planet, soleley to INSURE their power is maintained." (Emphasis added.)

That is how brazen, how blatant, is the leftist's hypocrisy. It seems either that they do not realize they are doing it, or believe it is right - at least, when they do it. I am reminded of a quote from the movie "Frost / Nixon" in which Richard Nixon (played by Frank Langella) infamously states, "I'm saying that when the President does it, that means it's not illegal!"

The best arguments against liberalism are almost always made by liberals.

Anonymous said...

so you people are not racist?

i am confused


you act like racists.

why are you so upset at being called a racist?

Anonymous said...

(sigh)
again,

insure

–verb (used with object)
1. to guarantee against loss or harm.
2. to secure indemnity to or on, in case of loss, damage, or death.
3. to issue or procure an insurance policy on or for.
4. ENSURE(defs. 1–3). (emphasis added)

further grammar clarification for your sake:

“Insure does relate to the buying and selling of insurance. However, people can also use it to mean "to make sure, certain, or secure," While you can often substitute ensure for insure, it is most often used in relation to the insurance industry in American English.

Ensure and insure can be considered synonyms because of their interchangeability. In fact, insure is actually within the definition of ensure: "to make sure or certain; insure." Use ensure in the following ways:
1.The dog was ensured that his owner would be home soon.
2.Billy was to ensure that the computer was packed safely.
3.He double-checked the stove to ensure it was off before leaving on vacation.
You can also use insure in any of the previous sentences ( Billy was to insure that the computer was packed safely .) without changing the meaning of the sentence, according to your dictionary. While either way is technically correct, it is important to note again that insure is most frequently associated with the commercial insurance industry. In that instance, you cannot substitute ensure for insure.”

most frequently and always are not the same, a fact that seems altogether lost to this site.
the point is however that the use of the word is correct, your criticism is a failure.


as far as the corrections in grammar, porter attempted to correct mine. as long as people are going to nit-pick my posts, i do not find it hypocritical to return the favor. to that end, by definition (sorry, i know you guys hate them) trifecta denotes a third. you list two points.

why would i assume that you are checking your dictionaries to see if you are a racist when it is alarmingly obvious you are not aware of the definition? i posted the definition of racist because you do not seem to know what the word means.

claiming not to be a racist and then immediately posting a racist comment is a fine bit of hypocrisy.

“This blog nor does its creator endorse racism at all, nor does it perpetuate it.”

followed by

“…and a quick glance at the massive differences in White-Black achievement in scholastics (despite the trillions spent since the 1950s trying to reduce that great divide) should dispel any idea of equality.”

the definition of racism is not contingent upon WHY you believe that one race is superior to another, simply that you do believe it. the above statement shows that you do indeed believe that whites are superior to blacks and such is racist.

Anonymous said...

"Let me ask you, would this qualify as a racist statement according to your dictionary?" no. it does not. while you may not appreciate this, what is it that you all refer to it as? HATE FACT, it is true. (hypocrisy...do i need to post the definition for this as well?) the difference however (and this is key) is that i do not think that all white people are typified as a result of it. it has been asserted time and again in this blog and in your comments that because any number of black people exhibit specific qualities that all black people must also. the article that the author attempts to use as support for this blog post does not mention the race of the criminals in question. (i have mentioned this several times with no response. still waiting) so perhaps it is not that black people do not like classical music, but that criminals do not. an assumption is made that criminal and black in this instance are equivocal, they are not. i do not stereotype white people as being power hungry and selfish simply because the vast majority of white men who have helped to shape our country and the world as we know it were and are. so no, that is not racist, and there is no hypocrisy inherent in my statement.

“But to take your risible assertion at face value, what then is the direct implication? That whites have no valid claim to their own lives or culture? Have you even begun to ponder this?”

here are my words,
“additionally, perserving your culture is fine. denouncing anothers in order to lift your own up is cowardly, pathetic and yes, immoral. regardless of your skin color.” what is the culture you want to preserve? the customs of your forefathers? i am irish, german, french (to name a few). i delight in playing celtic folk music, drinking a good whiskey and good beer, love german and french food. nothing wrong with that. are these the sorts of things you are referring to as your culture? or are speaking to the dominance white europeans have forced upon the people in the lands they conquered, or the ones they brought to the lands they conquered? if it is the latter then no, i do not think you or anyone else has any right to try to maintain that as part of your “culture”.

Anonymous said...

“I think he is capable of understanding that every single sub-group of humanity on the face of the planet works actively to further its own self-interest and to preserve its own culture and ethnic identity. Only in the case of whites is this considered immoral. I utterly reject this hypocrisy."
here is something i can agree with. i would be just as argumentative with an egyptian who was trying to preserve their cultural heritage or identity by claiming their right to enslave the jews. or any similar case. it seems a peculiarly specific tenet of "white pride" however that in order to be prideful of your race you have to despise another. give me a working example of another race who feels that in order to be prideful of their heritage they have to denigrate another and i will speak out against that as well.

“So if, for instance, a black slaughters your family in a home invasion I do hope you'll be able to accept it with graceful equanimity. After all, white people have done more to destroy the cultures of others than any other living thing on this planet. So why on Earth should your evil loved ones be allowed to live?”

i have made my stance clear that i believe wrong to be wrong regardless of skin color. i would no more accept an attack on my family “with graceful equanimity” from a white man than i would a black man.

“Are whites in your world to have no power over their own lives? You would certainly not dare deny blacks this fundamental right. After all, someone is going to wield power, be it political or military. But for whites, to pursue power is...what are your words again...yes, cowardly, pathetic, and immoral...yes there we are.”

regardless of who wields the power, to use that power to put (or attempt or even wish to) an entire group into a role of forced subjugation is, what were my words again…yes, cowardly, pathetic, and immoral. i would be making the same argument against anyone who did so, regardless of color.


your post:
“I take this success as self-evident simply given the overwhelming numbers of non-whites who clamber to get into every single white country--or should I say soon-to-be formerly white?”

also your post:
“But you...white liberal…***do point out a fictional world where whites are the most destructive force alive and draw millions upon millions of non-whites to their countries*** out of some bizarre retribution for whites having "taken everything they have."

you made the claim that non-whites are pouring into white countries. i provided a reason, which was necessity, not retribution. if the countries in question had an opportunity to establish their own governments and utilize their own resources as a means of establishing themselves as viable partners in a global economy they might not need to come to a country that has grown more prosperous at their expense. even if they tried and failed at least then when they came flooding into “white” countries you would have a defendable argument that they had an opportunity and failed of their own accord.

"Mexico, China, Phillipines, and India. Mexico, of course, provides millions more illegally. None of these immigrants are white and none have been "beaten the crap out of" in any way, shape, or form by any whites either literally or figuratively."

yes, white europeans did come into north, central and south america, kill and conquer the native people who lived there, took their land and resources and claimed it under their kingdom's flag. that covers mexico. the british did much of the same with india.

Anonymous said...

in relation to the phillipines, "President William McKinley decided to ask Spain to cede the Philippines to the United States in the Treaty of Paris (1898). Annexation was opposed by most Democrats and some Republicans, but supported particularly within the Republican Party for a variety of reasons, commercial as well as strategic. At Manila, fighting, largely provoked by the U.S. commanding general, Elwell S. Otis, broke out between American and Filipino forces on 4 February 1899, two days before the U.S. Senate narrowly ratified the treaty annexing the archipelago.

The Philippine War lasted from 1899 to 1902. Conventional unit warfare the first year, resulting in heavy Filipino casualties, was succeeded by substantial guerrilla warfare until Aguinaldo was captured by Frederick Funston in 1901." so they too were indeed "beaten" both figuratively and literally by whites.

china escapes scrutiny on my behalf in this particular instance, but 75% constitutes a majority. Japan did something very similar with china and I stand by my assertion that it was wrong of them to do so.

it is hypocritical to make claim that one race is largely at fault for the woes of our nation and world without taking to task your own race for their part in those same problems.

an argument seems to be made, time and again, that the ability for white americans to be as happy and prosperous as is possible is contingent completely upon the state of the black population in this country. if that is the case, you do your own race a disservice by not working to help to correct those issues. If that is not the case, then what do you care what black people do or do not like?


"If over half of black males don't finish school and 60% of that number are past or present convicts....well that sounds about like 1/3 my dear friend."

and

"Polls show that 1/3 of Black people wish to return to Apartheid-style rule. "

first of all, since when is 33% a majority? but let's use your (failed attempt at) logic to visit an earlier argument. "Roughly 33% of girls and 14% of boys are molested before the age of 18." additionally "Estimates are that only 35% of sexual abuse is reported" so that number is actually higher.(http://www.childmolestationvictim.com/statistics.html) as stated earlier, statistics show that the majority of sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by white males. so by your argument, all white males are to be typified as molesters. let's keep things straight here, i am not making that assertion. i am not claiming that because some number of a given population commit a specific act that all members of that population are to be stereotyped. i am using the logic that you used to make a case for your argument. it is hypocritical to make claim that one race should be stereotyped by use of such statistics while another should not be.

again, i make no claim on either side that any individual should be stereotyped because of the actions of a larger number of the population to which they belong. i no more look at white men and think "pedophile" than i look at a black man and think "criminal". by your own argument you would be a hypocrite not to.

Anonymous said...

a few random rebuttals.

"black people are lousy tippers, as any server will tell you" my friends who are servers have reported that black people have tipped them quite well. so an important qualifier is needed, SOME black people are lousy tippers. even if over half of them (i.e. a majority) are lousy tippers, not all of them are and as such your "fact" is at the very least misstated.

to porter
"Now if you'd like to come back on here and tell us that you would willingly live and raise your children in an environment covered in blue and orange dots where one out of every three males are criminal then you're either an idiot or a liar. I care not which." i do not anticipate raising my children in any neighborhood that is crime ridden, regardless of the skin color of the population. i live in a neighborhood with several black neighbors currently and have been less victimized than when i lived in a neighborhood populated predominantly by white people. there are many different reasons that crimes are committed, few of them have anything to do directly with skin color.

to the author,

"Merely, this blog acts to educate on Stuff Black People Don't Like."

is that your goal or is it "All we are trying to do here is show you that Black people support Black people at a rate is far above any racial - well, almost any racial - group on the planet." what of george w. bush? he was a horrific president who lied outright to the american public and now has hundreds of thousands of americans engaged in a bloody war half the world away, yet was elected twice. to point out the faults of another group while ignoring those same faults in your own group is hypocritical.

Anonymous said...

regardless, if that were "merely" all you were doing, you would present the information in a straightforward, unbiased manner. your agenda shines through the thin veneer of "education" you pronounce. the blog has an obvious bias against black people and works to sway others in that fashion. i believe i understand your reasoning for attempting to hide this fact. it seems you wish this to be a capitalist venture (you mention a book) and racist propaganda does not sell in this country beyond the fringe. or perhaps it is because you know that the majority of people look poorly upon racism and outing yourself in that capacity will immediately disable your petty little hate machine. a bit of advice though, hide your bigotry more thoroughly if you wish to be convincing. i have to admit it took me a little bit to see through the facade, but once i began to piece together the specific bits of evidence which lead to your true intent, it became glaringly obvious in all posts, whether they are part of the "official cannon" or not. there is a difference between saying "black people don't like x" and "black people don't like x because of (litany of racially biased statements and loosely formulated facts).

how do you anticipate facilitating an open and honest discussion about race if you are not open and honest about your own beliefs and intentions? It is hypocritical to charge that others be honest when you are not.

i do find it necessary to RE-iterate that my point in all of this is not that white people are more evil than any one else, or that black people do not have problems within their community. my point is that no race is any more inherently evil or despicable than any other and to insist that a whole group is 100 percent anything is faulty. all it takes is one black person to go against what you claim all black people do or do not do to nullify your argument that ALL black people do or do not engage in said action. and if you actually gave a crap about the state of america, white or black, you would do something more than post a blog to the internet dedicated to showing how despicable you think blacks are.

if you all find it so insulting to be called racist, perhaps you should rethink your racist beliefs. there is no questioning that they are just that. you are not racist because i call you a racist, you are racist because your actions and expressed beliefs fit the definition.

the label is pertinent to this discussion as your argument is neither open or honest as a result. it is tainted with bias, your mind is already made

Anonymous said...

SBPDL,

You can't hide the truth anymore. This modern day Shercock Holmes has painstakingly pieced together the evidence and discovered your bias.

If you aren't careful he'll next uncover the fact that you are using a computer to update this page. The wiley bastard!

Anonymous said...

i had several other posts prior to this. not sure where they went

Anonymous said...

"it's all a matter of personal taste".

It that's so, why the big stastical variance, why are the vast majority of classical musics fans whites or Asians as opposed to Blacks? Why are country music fans mostly white? Why do most Blacks like R and B but dislike hard rock?

As the great enlightened liberal, please explain.

Anonymous said...

what is there to explain? the majority of those people prefer one form of music over another. there may be many reasons as to why there is the preference, but that is what it is. it is not a genetic predisposition towards one type of music over another i would think. if it were, a large number of white people would not listen to rap music, which they do. either way the point is that not all black people dislike classical music just as not all black people do anything except have a greater amount of melanin than their white brethren.

also, sbpdl, please, please, PLEASE explain why it is the article makes no mention of race and yet you make the correlation. i know you have read my posts and as such have seen that it has been brought up several times.

as to the chap who makes a joke as to my pointing out how obvious the bias is, have you not read that the author refuses to acknowledge that openly?

ah! my posts did show up. wanderlost, i re-read your post and see that you do clearly state that there are two of a trifecta. my apologies. but, since i have clearly refuted the two you list i am curious as to what the third is.

Porter said...

Anonymous—Since your writing is so disjointed and non-linear (do schools no longer teach capitalization?) it’s somewhat difficult to know to what or whom you are responding. To enable smoother dialogue I’ll number my responses for your convenience.

1) Re insure/ensure. I’ll just say that you are embarrassing yourself, particularly by doubling down on your assertion that everyone else is wrong and you are right. This is an old inside joke in the *insurance* industry and thus the reason I pointed out your mistake in the first place. Though if you insist on playing the fool then far be it from me to thwart you.

2) Re the definition of racist: You’re confused on this point. It’s not that I am “alarmingly” ignorant of the term. It’s that I am “alarmingly” indifferent to it. I simply don’t care about being called a racist. The word holds no power over me. Also I have never claimed to not be a racist; just as I have never claimed to prefer paisley over plaid. I just don't care. Hopefully this will forestall the need for you to keep rushing back time and again to your dog-eared dictionary for help.

3) "Let me ask you, would this qualify as a racist statement according to your dictionary?" no. it does not. while you may not appreciate this, what is it that you all refer to it as? HATE FACT, it is true. “

You’ve unwittingly put yourself in a trap here. You take the position that a point is not “racist” if it is true. Well that’s nice. Then it is not racist to observe that blacks as a group are dumb, violent, corrupt, and incapable of forming functional, thriving communities. Or do we need to provide information on racial IQ scores, violent crime rates, civic dysfunction, or the state of every failed black country in the history of the world?

4) “it has been asserted time and again in this blog and in your comments that because any number of black people exhibit specific qualities that all black people must also.”

That’s funny. Since I’ve purportedly asserted this again and again, it would be quite easy for you to cite one single example—except that you can’t. It is in fact you who have trotted out this straw man over and over, not me.

There are several highly intelligent blacks. Yet the problem that you can’t grasp is that societies are not formed by their outliers, but by their general populations. If the world was full of Thomas Sowells then there would be no anti-black sentiment whatsoever. But the world is not full of these people. There are precious few of them. And thus black society does not reflect their influence in the slightest. In the end, numbers are of the essence.

5) “i do not stereotype white people as being power hungry and selfish simply because the vast majority of white men who have helped to shape our country and the world as we know it were and are”

(Laughing) Well how charitable of you, good man. And how open-minded to not stereotype all of us as power hungry and selfish just because the vast majority of us were and are. You really are blissfully oblivious. That you can make this statement without a trace of irony is a hoot. I’ll make a deal: In the future, I will try not to stereotype blacks as lazy, dumb, and violent just because the vast majority of them were and are. Sound good?

More to come...

Anonymous said...

Blacks hate Opera (classical music's cousin) as well.

Porter said...

6) “what is the culture you want to preserve? the customs of your forefathers? i am irish, german, french (to name a few). i delight in playing celtic folk music, drinking a good whiskey and good beer, love german and french food.”

No. I take it as an article of faith that I am allowed to play Danny Boy on a tin whistle while consuming Guinness and bratwurst in my kitchen. That isn’t the point at all.

The point is that the public schools, funded 90% with white taxes, actually teach something other than Rosa Parks, Cesar Chavez, and black history. The point is that whites do not owe free health care or any other social welfare to alien squatters. The point is that the very government paid for with our taxes should not establish myriad programs designed to discriminate against us. The point is that private citizens should have the right to associate freely with those they wish and openly avoid those they dislike. The point is that there should not be great swaths of our formerly beautiful countries which resemble third-world war zones. This would be a start.

7) “give me a working example of another race who feels that in order to be prideful of their heritage they have to denigrate another and i will speak out against that as well.”

Well, I looked around at some pro-black websites with many anti-white comments and didn’t see a single thread with you disparaging black misdeeds for balance. Odd that. But I’m being facetious. We both know that your exquisite racial piety is limited exclusively to whites and thus is no racial piety whatsoever. In fact, you are a boilerplate white-hating leftist who wouldn’t dare speak critically on a pro-black website. And I feel terribly for you in this regard. Through the sheer weight of propaganda and peer pressure you’ve had a natural sense of who you are stripped and replaced with self-loathing. I can’t tell you the contempt I feel for the scum who did this to you.

8) “i have made my stance clear that i believe wrong to be wrong regardless of skin color. i would no more accept an attack on my family “with graceful equanimity” from a white man than i would a black man.”

That’s nice, but it doesn’t address the point whatsoever. You said that white people have done more to destroy the cultures of others than any other living thing on this planet. If this is correct then whites represent a truly malevolent force. So no loss if your white loved ones were murdered--after all, who knows what cultures they would destroy if left alive.

As an aside, I'll note that white aid has provided for enormous numbers of non-whites worldwide for many years. In contrast I am unaware of any large-scale aid ever provided by a non-white country to a (formerly) white country in the history of the world. But you should never let this fact enter your mind.

9) “regardless of who wields the power, to use that power to put (or attempt or even wish to) an entire group into a role of forced subjugation is, what were my words again…yes, cowardly, pathetic, and immoral.

Who on this thread has ever mentioned forced subjugation other than you? Do you hear voices and respond to them online?

10) “you made the claim that non-whites are pouring into white countries”

No *I* don’t make that claim. Every official record-keeping entity in nearly every single (formerly) white country makes that claim.

Wanderlost said...

"i re-read your post and see that you do clearly state that there are two of a trifecta."

Though I am pleased that I was able to contribute to the improvement of your reading comprehension skills, I am far more pleased at your apparent acknowledgement of their need for improvement.

"i have clearly refuted the two you list"

I would be remiss in my new duties as personal trainer to your atrophied ability to interpret the written word if I failed to mention that the word you're looking for is not "refuted," but rather "verified."

The cry of "racism" and/or of "racist" is an ad hominem argument. It is not an attack (much less a refutation) upon an argument - it is an attack upon the person making the argument and invalid in honest debate (unless you're using Mein Obama's definition of "honest debate," which translated to English is "agreeing with me"). As it is nothing more than an insult, its definition is irrelevant.

As for hypocrisy, I must congratulate you on your meteoric rise to "blind epitome thereof." I apologize for prematurely invoking the phrase "deafening crescendo," as your latest contribution sent me to an otologist on hands and knees (so destroyed was my sense of balance), my ears twin fountains of blood.

When taken to task for your incorrect use of one vs. another similarly spelled words - which you had quoted from the dictionary (asserting with ASCII arrow the difference), you now backpedal to such a degree as to assert that they are synonyms though the dictionary does not state that they are.

On the other hand, you're perfectly pleased with your dictionary's description of "racist."

Though 'tis INDEED the sport to have the engineer hoisted with his own petard, I will yield the "insure vs. ensure" argument. It is irrelevant, and apparent that I must yield lest it become the point of discussion. Regardless, the "hypocrisy" angle is only secondary of the Holy Trinity of Liberal "Argumentation" and always yields again. Point(less) yielded.

If I have erred in attributing to one personality the statements that should have been attributed to another, I apologize. However, with so many personalities unable or unwilling to characterize themselves as anything other than "Anonymous," honest errors will occur.

If I have indeed erred in this fashion, I apologize and would kindly request that, especially considering our new relationship, you please identify yourself. I assure you that there is no registration process necessary; merely select "Name/URL" under the "Comment As" dropdown, and fill in whatever you wish (the "URL" field is unnecessary).

Let us then start anew; to this end, I have but one question:

What *is* your thesis?

Definition 2a, Merriam-Webster's online. More or less. :)

Wanderlost said...

To Porter:

"It is in fact you who have trotted out this straw man"

Damn you, Porter; I was waiting to segue into the third of the August Triumvirate of Liberal "Argumentation: [sic]" the STRAW MAN.

Actually, since it and hypocrisy make eternal bedfellows, I suggest another entrant: MOVING THE GOALPOST.

It's a distant third, because it requires revisiting an argument and replying with something more than insults or straw man arguments.

Anonymous said...

i have spent too much time already typing and re-typing the same things over, and over, and over. i have grown weary of having my words twisted and of having very specific points ignored . you will chalk it up to a win no doubt, a sure fire sign of your mental prowess. i liken it more to teaching a foreign language to a rock. it was an endeavor i knew to be foolish and assumed it would be a complete waste of time, but i was invited to this site and was so disgusted i could not keep my fingers still.

i have no desire for any of you to know who i am in any way whatsoever. anonymous is as much as you need to know.

sleep easy friends, you have beaten down another free thinking human with you onslaught of ignorance.

you have the world exactly as you have envisioned it, divided and in peril.

congratulations.

Anonymous said...

wanderlost

insure

–verb (used with object)
1. to guarantee against loss or harm.
2. to secure indemnity to or on, in case of loss, damage, or death.
3. to issue or procure an insurance policy on or for.
4. ENSURE(defs. 1–3). (emphasis added)

further grammar clarification for your sake:

“Insure does relate to the buying and selling of insurance. However, people can also use it to mean "to make sure, certain, or secure," While you can often substitute ensure for insure, it is most often used in relation to the insurance industry in American English.

Ensure and insure can be considered synonyms because of their interchangeability. In fact, insure is actually within the definition of ensure: "to make sure or certain; insure." Use ensure in the following ways:
1.The dog was ensured that his owner would be home soon.
2.Billy was to ensure that the computer was packed safely.
3.He double-checked the stove to ensure it was off before leaving on vacation.

You can also use insure in any of the previous sentences ( Billy was to insure that the computer was packed safely .) without changing the meaning of the sentence, according to your dictionary. ***While either way is technically correct***, it is important to note again that insure is most frequently associated with the commercial insurance industry. In that instance, you cannot substitute ensure for insure.”

over and over and over and over.

sorry, i meant to point that out before granting you your victory by way of my forfeiture in this ridiculous conversation.
my thesis is clearly explained, but seriously, what chance do i have against people who will argue with a dictionary entry?

Porter said...

Wanderlost: Indeed, those tactics are as old as left-wing thought itself...though I've walked right into an oxymoron haven't I?

Anon: Well darn. I certainly hate that I have twisted your words by quoting them. That was rather unsporting of me. Next time I'll try to respond to what you really meant down deep in your golden little heart rather than the words which uncontrollably spring from your fingertips.

And you are actually complaining about having specific points ignored? Now that is rich indeed given that I am in the midst of responding *point-by-point* to them. What a strange and mysterious thing is the mind of a leftist.

Yet I am undeterred. Endeavor to persevere...

11) “even if they tried and failed at least then when they came flooding into “white” countries you would have a defendable argument that they had an opportunity and failed of their own accord.”

Hey, now we’re getting somewhere. So once these countries fail of their own accord only *then* do we have the right to defend our sovereign nations. Well thanks guy! At least though we have some criteria to work with, and what do you know...Mexico, Guatemala, El Salvador, Haiti, Somalia, Vietnam etc ad infinitum have all tried and failed. Anon says that we can now actually defend our countries from invasion. That's a relief.

12) “yes, white europeans did come into north, central and south america, kill and conquer the native people who lived there, took their land and resources and claimed it under their kingdom's flag. that covers mexico. the british did much of the same with india.”

You probably don’t even know what you’re referencing here, but I’ll presume it’s Cortez and his sacking of Tenochtitlan in 1520. So in your mind the Mayan…errr Mexican country hasn’t had ample opportunity to recover and prosper in 490 years. Thus the Mayans, I mean Mexicans, must now stream into Spain, I mean America, which was wilderness a 100 years after the Spaniards, I mean Americans, conquered the Mayans, I mean Mexicans.

This theory probably also explains why white Europeans flooded into Mongolia following the 13th century invasion by the Khans. The Mongolians “took their land and resources, killed and conquered the native people and claimed it under their kingdom’s flag.” As a result, white civilization was unable to flourish in its native lands and thus the populations flooded into Mongolia, and still do so to this day. In fact, very soon Mongolia will cease to be majority Mongolian and will soon be majority white. Mongolians should welcome this since white countries have not yet had the chance to fail of their own accord.

Do you hear the little cuckoo-birds in your head when you analogously propose such lunatic historical fantasies?

13) Re Philippines. At least you’re moving up from 490 years of excusing failure to just 110. In 1900 the population of the Philippines was 7 million. Today it is 92 million. Would you like to show us the rapacious white nations which have grown so rapidly? Philippines beaten down? Hardly. If the Filipinos continue to be “beaten down” at this rate, they will be as numerous as the Chinese in 100 years. I only pray that whites are as “beaten down” themselves in the future.

14)"If over half of black males don't finish school and 60% of that number are past or present convicts....well that sounds about like 1/3 my dear friend." first of all, since when is 33% a majority?

Who said anything about a majority? Is 1 in 3 black male criminals not enough for you? I wonder if one of your black buddies kicked you square in the nuts just once every three days if you'd still be pals.

Porter said...

16) “statistics show that the majority of sexual abuse cases are perpetrated by white males.”

Well that’s interesting, because statistics also show that whites make up 65% of the population. So if they commit, say 55% of the molestations they are actually doing so at a below average rate of incidence. And if blacks are comitting say 45%, then they are doing so at an enormously inflated rate of incidence. Let's see...blacks committing crimes at rates far beyond their numbers. Who would ever believe that?

17) “i do not anticipate raising my children in any neighborhood that is crime ridden, regardless of the skin color of the population”

So you’re going to assiduously avoid all of those high-crime white neighborhoods? That’s a good choice. And you say you might move into a prosperous, safe, and friendly black neighborhood? Well, tell Tiger Woods and Shaq I said hello.

I'm done. So sorry again that your points were all ignored. I hate when that happens.

Wanderlost said...

"i have spent too much time already typing and re-typing the same things over, and over, and over"

Indeed. You have yet to bring support for any of your thinly veiled insults despite multiple requests (long before I posted here), and instead simply chant "racist."

You hypocritically make accusations against an entire race, doing nothing more than committing the very same crime you purport to denounce.

When an intelligent and cogent individual responds to you, you call him "racist."

When your insults are swatted aside, and substance for your ersatz "arguments" is demanded, you simply "re-type the same things over, and over, and over."

Instead of choosing to stay on track with a discussion of race, you start quoting the dictionary, a topic which soon occupies the plurality (if not majority) of your posts - while Porter makes but passing comment of the issue - and you have the temerity to accuse *others* of "arguing with the dictionary!"

Even when I personally become so sick of your apparent desire for "victory by lexicon" that I yield the "ensure vs. insure" argument and asked you "what is your point [thesis]," you're unable to even tell me what your point, or thesis, is. "Clearly explained?" Not here. Theses are a few sentences long, and you can't do that?

You've been given the opportunity to start anew by stripping the conversation of nonsense, irrelevance, and insults...

...and you can't do it. It has become apparent that nonsense, irrelevance, and insults are all you have to offer.

Typical.

No sir, it is not by any "forfeiture" that your opponent Porter (I suppose I came here too late to receive the boon of your saintly patience) has claimed "victory." It is by the constant confutation of your arguments, and your own admission that you repeating yourself in response.

Anonymous said...

motherfuck

okay.

we'll do this one at a time.

it will be non linear. get over it.

and yes i realize i am a hypocrite for claiming to be done with this and continuing on. save it.

you
"Who said anything about a majority? Is 1 in 3 black male criminals not enough for you? I wonder if one of your black buddies kicked you square in the nuts just once every three days if you'd still be pals."

you
"In the future, I will try not to stereotype blacks as lazy, dumb, and violent just because the vast majority of them were and are."

and

"Yet the problem that you can’t grasp is that societies are not formed by their outliers, but by their general populations"

so by your own admission, 1/3 is not a majority, and yet you claim that this community is defined by their general population. how can it be both a minority and their general population?

Anonymous said...

wanderlost:

"i do find it necessary to RE-iterate that my point in all of this is not that white people are more evil than any one else, or that black people do not have problems within their community. my point is that no race is any more inherently evil or despicable than any other and to insist that a whole group is 100 percent anything is faulty. "

that is two sentences, and very clearly stated. every statement i have made works to support this.

we'll save the rest for when you have a chance to respond. i want to proceed in as unconvoluted a fashion as is possible so as to prevent any further confusion on the part of you and your compatriots.

Porter said...

"motherfuck"

(laughing) I do believe our boy has very nearly blown a circuit board. It's almost as if his left-wing programming simply can't process the words he's reading, and as a result I fear we're approaching "Fatal Error."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fatal_error

Though I'm sure Wanderlost could savage your last rhetorical with aplomb I suppose I'll go ahead and state the obvious for you in response:

"so by your own admission, 1/3 is not a majority, and yet you claim that this community is defined by their general population. how can it be both a minority and their general population?"

(sorry, can't help but laugh again here) Yes, you have me firmly on record now: 1/3 is *not* a majority. Though if you'll read closely, as Wanderlost has futilely urged, you'll note that the 1/3 figure was in reference to black criminals.

In contrast, the statement that I used to mock you on stereotypes was *not* limited to criminal activity. To quote you quoting me, the words were "lazy, dumb, and violent." Two of these are manifestly legal and the last may or may not involve incarceration.

So I'll make the model simple for us both going forward. We'll categorize the black population in even thirds: low intelligence, indolent, and violent. Only 1/3 of these will get homey put in the can. Though I will argue (with no fear of successful contradiction) that all three contribute to the pathologies present in black society.

Anonymous said...

and where are your numbers for the latter two?


i know you guys are tired of this, but throw an idiot liberal a bone here and explain away for me the dictionary entry and grammar clarification pertaining to insure/ensure. i see that paul has made several passive aggressive entries which you have applauded him for. i cannot for the life of me figure out where i and the dictionary are wrong and you and your dear friend are correct.

and wanderlost, doesn't your making mention of me "arguing with a dictionary" constitute a straw man argument considering that i wrote that you all are arguing with a dictionary entry? they are two entirely different things. the omission of the last word changes the context of the sentence completely.

Stuff Black People Don't Like said...

My girlfriend is in Richmond tonight for the symphony. She goes often. She has never, not once, seen a Black person in the audience.

I'd wager this scene is repeated in every major city that has a symphony. I have been to the Atlanta symphony, and the audience had one Token Black who was trying his best to Act White.

Anonymous said...

edit: i meant the latter of the two in context to the first mentioned, violence.

more to the point, what numbers do you have to support that the other two thirds of the black community exist in the fashion you claim that they do?

Anonymous said...

Iranian noted: "Very true! However, in all fairness, let it be stated that there have been some negresses who have been great singers: Shirely Verrett, Grace Bumbry, and Leontyne Price, come to mind."

Yes, but THEY did not CREATE the music they sang, they were DIRECTED to careers in the arts BECAUSE OF WHITE VOICE TEACHERS!

As scores of music departments across the nation in NASM schools are watching organ departments shrivel and die, while 'music industry' divisions thrive, one wonders why? The reason is TOTALLY racial. Protestant and Catholic church music used to count the Organ as a prerequisite to Divine Worship- now it, along with four-part polyphony, is taking a back seat to lyrics of praise choruses, monotonous uulations masquerading as melody, and drum trap sets on the ALTARS of churches, all because of 'black culture' taking over even in the Presbyterian and Methodist Churches!

This is now the Catch-22 'Pandora's Box' for university and college music departments (because it [music industry, jazz programs, classes in 'rap [sic] music' and the like, gives these departments numbers, students, prestige, and miraculously (voila!) solves the 'racial quota' problem- (for what black student goes into Classical music?)... yet such a short term solution, ultimately destroys art music as the FOUNDATION of any legitimate music program of a Western University...)

Price et al. did what they did because it gave them LEGITIMACY as Black women in a 'White Man's world.' Yet even the most honest concert goer finds a Negro ludicrous in a pannier, white wig, and aping Donna Anna in Don Giovanni- this is a White man's art form, for crying out loud!

There even used to be sections of vocal pedagogy textbooks noting the 'unique' facial structure and overtone series of 'the Negro voice' - now, however, faculty get called on the carpet for even MENTIONING such truths, for 'we're all one race,' etc.

Whenever I hear c[rap] music blaring from a car stereo next to me, I zip in my "Ride of the Valkyries" as LOUD AS I CAN. Inevitably, they freak out, that a 'white man' would DARE play 'that kind of music' - yeah, well, ' it's a white thing, you wouldn't understand.'

-AlmostMusicPhD

P.S. that's why the new version of the movie, "Fame" is so much HOGWASH. The Black pianist in an upscale oreo household, who 'finds herself' singing rap.... puh-leez. At least Irene Cara could sing the title song better in the 1980's- and disco is so much better music than rap! (LOL)

Porter said...

Anon: Your 10/10 1:39pm post was...weak. If you lack the ability or inclination to defend your positions (and frankly I've seen none of the former), then just admit as much and move on. But this squid ink is getting tiresome.

Though to continue, here's one of the innumerable links for race/IQ correlation:

http://www.news-medical.net/news/2005/04/26/9530.aspx

*Around the world, the average IQ for East Asians centers around 106; for Whites, about 100; and for Blacks about 85 in the U.S. and 70 in sub-Saharan Africa.

*Brain Size Differences. Studies using magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) find a correlation of brain size with IQ of about 0.40. Larger brains contain more neurons and synapses and process information faster. Race differences in brain size are present at birth. By adulthood, East Asians average 1 cubic inch more cranial capacity than Whites who average 5 cubic inches more than Blacks.

*Trans-Racial Adoption Studies. Race differences in IQ remain following adoption by White middle class parents. East Asians grow to average higher IQs than Whites while Blacks score lower. The Minnesota Trans-Racial Adoption Study followed children to age 17 and found race differences were even greater than at age 7: White children, 106; Mixed-Race children, 99; and Black children, 89.

As for black laziness, I didn't expect to find many empirical resources--this isn't the sort of topic which draws much grant money. In some areas we are forced to rely on our lying eyes and lifetime of experiences. However, to my surprise I found one such study.

http://africanamericanpragmatist.blogspot.com/2009/06/low-effort-syndrome-just-another-label.html

Here were the shocking results of a study conducted by a black and reported by a black...

"During the course of the study, Ogbu and his researchers found that, in general, White students studied more, worked harder and cared more about getting good grades. Even more interesting was the fact that Black students knew one had to work hard to succeeded, but didn’t. Ogbu characterized this as low-effort syndrome. . . . “[They] were not highly engaged in their schoolwork and homework.’ And their parents and communities, wittingly or not, supported them…"

Did I say "laziness?" I meant to say that blacks are suffering from "low effort syndrome." Yeah, that's the ticket.

Anonymous said...

you talk as if none of the aforementioned would even occur if not for the fact that a white man made money from the endeavor. ridiculous. if "your" music is failing as an art-form you most certainly do not have the black man to blame.

Anonymous said...

"Yet even the most honest concert goer finds a Negro ludicrous in a pannier, white wig, and aping Donna Anna in Don Giovanni"

anyone, white or black, looks ridiculous in this context.

if you don't agree, dress up, post a pic and see what people say.

Anonymous said...

I have to agree with the person who said that music preferences are a matter of individual taste. If classical music can only be enjoyed by whites, how do you explain the bajillion Asian musicians who like to play classical music?

Anonymous said...

"1) Re insure/ensure. I’ll just say that you are embarrassing yourself, particularly by doubling down on your assertion that everyone else is wrong and you are right. This is an old inside joke in the *insurance* industry and thus the reason I pointed out your mistake in the first place. Though if you insist on playing the fool then far be it from me to thwart you."

you explain to me how the dictionary is wrong.

go ahead.

Anonymous said...

Black people are not one 'species'-so it would be more respectful to stop talking as if they are a herd of type of people, and furthermore Classical music is not purely a Western creation. The slave trade (and prior to that the exotic sex trade) was created long before it hit jackpot in the US, and many classical composers were influenced by the music of other cultures (listen to the interaction of Eastern European (Bloch) Folk Music and Gypsy (considered 'low' music at the time), African, Asian and Spanish. Additionally, all of those listed are fairly broad, but really listen to Classical music, and one will hear the history behind it (the drums, the melodies and how they come in and out, the homes of the rhythms). Geographically, it is nearly impossibly that the music of Southern Europe and Northern Africa did not intersect at a given point; moreover, one cannot depend on Western history, often biased towards Western European culture to account for this and even more so, history itself is an endless story, and the more we learn about the time period, the more richly we understand the arts of the time, political struggles, and dietary phenomenons.

Gershwin was fully inspired by jazz music and incorporated it in his symphonies, and William Grant Still is a prominent African American composer. Additionally, upon the invention of the radio, composers overseas were also inspired by American Blues and Jazz (Hindemith).

The drum is important to African Music, but so is harmony and the spirit, as call and response is a widely known tradition in both African and African American Music and in Folk musics across the world. Contemporary Classical Composers have utilized this very much so, particularly composers who want to create and improvisational-like bit in their compositions.

Also many black blues and jazz musicians were denied the ability to even listen to their own music in white only clubs, how does one suppose a black person could easily enter the field of music (especially in America) when the segregation was so alive and the government making laws that clearly gave partiality to the majority-therefore excluding many black people from certain sports to genres of music and high paying or prominent professions. Black doctors could not practice, blacks were forced to live in certain neighborhoods with silent racism and often those neighborhoods did not have community pools (black people can swim like everyone else) black performers (Josephine Baker) were not allowed perform in respectable venues, and black lawyers could not practice (Paul Robenson). Classical music is a beautiful art form historically tainted with colonialism and oppression. That being said, many Europeans of African descent were able to prosper in the classical music field because Europe banned slavery before the US and although still racist, never reached the extreme hate created amongst citizens of the US during slavery.

Lastly, it is becoming quite dated to identify hoards of people as black, white and/or Asian, it is much more logical and beneficial to look at small groups of people that have the same geographical/cultural background-and even then still acknowledging ones individual taste. Within in China alone there are over sixty different ethnicities. Plus, in America, people from Eurasia (Eastern/Southern Europe) were considered black for a while, and some instruments were not yet invented...so where did the inspiration come to invent them? Another thing to think about is when something Paris or Florence was called 'Bohemian' (out of norm, new, etc...) it was 'the norm' for someone else.

Anonymous said...

continued:


Also, it is most beneficial to take a course on the accomplishments of people outside of the dominant kind in ones country. As in specific response to this article, black people have done so much more ( a black person invented the stoplight for example , created some of the first stop watches, farmers almanac...see this website to see the accomplishments of blacks, in addition to rap.

http://inventors.about.com/od/blackinventors/a/black_inventors.htm

http://www.blackinventor.com/

Speaking of rap, which is an amazing and powerful art form, that really helped and still does propel activism (and if you analyze the lyrics you will find a lot of social and political issues discussed...an example often missed---the song "trying to catch me ridin dirty" is about racial profiling. Of course, there is some less intellectual rap just like there is less intellectual pop, country, classical, hard rock, etc...Also to be noted, there is a Native American rap, which is inspired by african american rap/hip hop due to its effectiveness as a creative form...(my information is NOT from wikipedia...but I am using some of these links to help as support in this informal comment). Also, Bhungra, music that really helped boost the self esteem and cultural stamina of American Indians was inspired by hip-hop/rap:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhangra

Wikipedia: About Bhangra

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Native_American_hip_hop

Wikipedia: About Native American Hip hop

See also:
http://chevalierdesaintgeorges.homestead.com/others.html
"Composers of African Decent, Afro-American, African, Afro-European"

http://www.sphinxmusic.org/
"Latino and Black Symphony Orchestra: Created to Diversify Classical Music"


There is so much to discuss!-but this is all I have in me for now, can't wait to post again!

Wanderlost said...

"Anonymous said...

wanderlost

insure

–verb "

Seriously?

I have to wonder what your dictionary gives for a description of "yield." I distinctly remember saying I yielded the "ensure vs. insure" argument, yet here you are kicking the dead horse - quoting from (of all things) yet another dictionary.

Now you apparently wish to make this insignificant - and yielded! - argument the entire issue.

This brings us, class, to a variant of the Holy Triumvirate of Liberal "Argumentation [sic];" the Straw Man. Here's how it "works:"

1) Find the one thing you CAN argue within your opponent's comments
2) Seize upon this one point as though it were central - or even relevant! - to your opponent's argument
3) Destroy the irrelevant argument
4) Claim victory

It would be laughable if only so many morons didn't use, and accept, this tactic - and if it weren't so damn hypocritical to begin making an argument by (as I've said before) quoting dictionary entries that show a difference between the two words, then finding one that supports your argument when you're forced to either move the goalpost or admit unequivocal defeat.

So you have no other argument except irrelevant semantic quabbles that have already been abandoned.

Bra-VO.

Anonymous said...

I'm black. I LOVE Classical music. I MOSTLY listen only film soundtracks when i'm done with classical music.
What you describe on this website are TENDENCIES. Not every single black person is like that. Lots of us are. Lot of us are not. And lot of those things also apply to other ethnic groups.

I enjoy reading a fair number of your observations. Some are useful to open many eyes. some even make me smile. But some of them are a little bit biased. Remember that beyond skin color, we're all human beings and not everybody is trapped on this chessboard-like black-white racial illusion.

Anonymous said...

This is the funniest waste of time that I have ever had the pleasure to read.

Anyone stupid enough to buy into this generalisation really has not travelled, read or lived life outside of there own personal blogosphere.

I wish that the whole race issue would dissappear into a human issue.

I feel frustration at the time we all waste on this planet looking for the differences when we have so little time to make one and the only silver lining in this huge cloud is that one day aliens will come to Earth and laugh at the fact that while we were defining ourselves by colour, country and religion they were stockpiling enough weapons to kick our human backsides.

But enough frivolity....If the original question is close to being serious, wake up! The people who make the decisions on this planet don't care about your bigotry or the arguments that ensue.

If your concern is that a section of the community is missing out, educate them. If you seek to make a point what benefit does an answer do you or any of us.

I would love to say more but as a Black (HUMAN)European classical musician I have got work to do
and people of all colours to share it with.

Anonymous said...

As a white brazilian male, I can attest that here in Brazil only white people listen to classical musical. All black people hwew, with the exception of maybe 5 individuals, hate classical music.

This is a trend around the world and the answer is the one in the article. They simply don't feel it's their heritage. This article gave me a great idea to scare off black people: play classical music. I don't know if it means a lot, but thank you.