New - Web Guide: Ecology, Solidarity, Personal Growth, Social Change, Countries ... Shopping Guide: Books, DVD, Music ... - Espaņol Contents, Index, Random - Board - Donate, About

People in Action: Message Board: Web Guide: Social Change: People: King, Martin Luther: 3

Guide Board More

Martin Luther King: 3

Message board, and more on Martin Luther King -> Websites Messages

Related topics:

Martin Luther King

Page 1 2 3 4 Board Search | Last Day, Three Days, Week | Log In | Log Out | Register | Profile | Tree | Help

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 59 Apr 04, 2009 - 20:32    In America, Northerners tend to be better-educated than Southerners. Whites from the Northeast are some of the most knowledgeable people in the world. Northern police officers refused to beat up on civil rights activists, because they knew the Civil Rights Movement would backfire on its own, and give them the tools to "do their thing" on a much longer-term basis.

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 61 Apr 05, 2009 - 14:37    Speaking of mulattoes in the Civil Rights Movement--they temporarily proved their bravery and loyalty to their race, but in the end they totally destroyed each other's self-esteem, making it impossible to maintain their noble cause. I guess this is inevitable because of history. Americans are conditioned to believe in happy endings, but in the real world it doesn't work that way. Self-esteem is an insidious thing. Once it is ruined, you are bound to do things--unconsciously--to worsen the problem. A non-American friend of mine actually pointed this out to me during a viewing of the movie Dangerous Liasons. At the end of the movie, I insisted that Uma Thurman's relationship with Keanu Reeves would work out. He said no way, because John Malkovich had robbed her of her self-esteem. Maybe he had more realistic ideas about life than the rest of us.

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 64 Apr 06, 2009 - 23:10    Dr. King falsely assumed that a violent protest would turn all whites against blacks. To the contrary. Through various subtle means, the Black Power Movement actually recruited white men into their value system--permanently. And I mean mainstream, upper-middle-class white men, who the police are hesitant to challenge. For instance, I once read an article by a teenaged biracial girl from Illinios. She did not look biracial. She looked black. However, in her essay she discussed how many advantages she had because of her white father. Most black women with white fathers do not feel advantaged. They feel oppressed, orphaned, and endangered. However, the Black Power Movement insisted that "black is beautiful", causing many whites to believe it. This girl's attitude toward her father merely reflects HIS attitude toward HER, and her mother. If this man accepts some black power values, he likely accepts virtually all of them. If it came down to it, he might blow another white man's head off to protect his chaste and virtuous daughter. There are probably many more families like this in Illinios. This is how the Black Power Movement ultimately overpowered their enemies with violence--without really trying. On the other hand, they were shot down and scattered before they had a chance to spread. Moreover, most blacks along the East Coast were too emotionally invested in Dr. King's way of doing things to accept other viewpoints anyway. I strongly suggest any female of the ethnicity described here to run--don't walk--to the state of Illinois. The Deep South is also worth considering. Message edited by the author on Apr 06, 2009 - 23:18 Message edited by the author on Apr 06, 2009 - 23:24 Message edited by the author on Apr 06, 2009 - 23:54

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 65 Apr 07, 2009 - 04:49    I just had a thought. We all remember that black guy who raped and murdered a pregnant white woman in Georgia--the one Reagan kept using in his election campaign (with great success I might add). That is not the sort of thing a black man would normally do. For one thing, it would be far too dangerous--UNLESS he was PAID to do this, in order to put the Republicans in power. Or maybe he didn't even commit the crime. Maybe a third party was hired to do the job, and he was framed. Who knows? Some people are absolutely ruthless, with no morals whatsoever. I'm not naming any names, but they know who they are. But you know, if blacks did their civil rights job absolutely properly, with the law of supply and demand in mind, the rape and torture of the white woman would be the inevitable result. Once you have used these economic principles to permanently suppress whites' arms production, it wouldn't matter anyway, because they would be powerless to retaliate. The way to achieve this, of course, is to peacefully campaign to abolish the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. But since that's not going to happen, blacks are eventually going to be wiped off the face of the planet, largely at the hands of biracial people who are tired of being deemed safe targets for blacks' depravity and savagery. Message edited by the author on Apr 07, 2009 - 05:16

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 66 Apr 08, 2009 - 05:37    I already explained that the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment actually empowered blacks' enemies to commit even more exquisite atrocities than before. This has nothing to do with moral or spiritual principles--it's more fundamental. The law of supply and demand applies to all traded goods and services, both public and private. When you demand a good or service, including police protection and such, you also stimulate supply. Kennedy was a fairweather friend to blacks--he implemented a policy which could be viciously used against blacks if race relations soured. His policies were also totally bereft of warmth, because he made no provisions to ensure that biracial people--who cannot possibly be held responsible for the state of race relations--would be kept out of the line of "fire" if race relations did sour. He simply left this issue to an each-man-for-himself game of chance. The U.S. actually has a more respectful policy toward North Korea than it does toward black Americans. I think their relationship will eventually work out. I do not think race relations in America will work out. I think one race will ultimately brutally annihilate the other one. Message edited by the author on Apr 08, 2009 - 05:52

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 68 Apr 08, 2009 - 22:27    In a previous post, I mentioned that the Black Power Movement used white professional males to overcome their enemies with violence. Some of these w.p. men have black offspring, and are also capable of winning an extended violent confrontation with men in uniform if necessary. Unlike the U.S. government, they will never run out of the resources to fight. Like typical white men, they wait quietly, like horses in the stable, while their adversaries are forced to fritter their power away through overt activity. So in a sense, enemies to the U.S. government are even whiter than the government itself. I wonder if this is one of the reasons Obama got elected. As a senator from Illinios, he probably perceived this to be the case.

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 69 Apr 09, 2009 - 22:29    Oh and one more thing--regarding the teenaged girl from Illinois whose essay I alluded to in a post. Her comments seem a far cry from a Black Power promotion, because they are in no way hostile toward whites. Well, some people are simply agreeable by nature, and once they know they have won, they return to their usual "niceness". Being prejudiced, whites tend to take peoples' attitudes at face value. I'm sure Amerasians from North Korea are pretty nice too, but deep down they're darn glad their native military has the U.S. at gunpoint. This is, after all, the source of their freedom and citizenship. Most people take other peoples' attitudes at face value, and don't bother to analyze the underlying reasons why they behave the way they do. So ironically, the best way to get along with whites is to crush them with violence. And if you REALLY like freedom, then you want to be in a position where you don't have to worry about getting along with them, in which case you should stifle their arms production altogether by trashing the Equal Protection clause of the 14th Amendment. This is, by the way, the ultimate goal of warfare--to eliminate an enemy's arms production. It works just as well if achieved by peaceful means. A great military author once wrote that the way to achieve victory is to "sever or upset (an enemy's)communications". In other words, we should destroy any relationship which enables them to develop weaponry. Like most experts in their field, he had a philosophical approach to warfare. His works were not so much a guide for the military, as an instruction for peace activists on how to destroy an armed enemy. Being a general in a heavily armed nation, he could not possibly achieve this himself, so he published his works to the general public in hopes that someone would catch on. (If he truly gave a s**t about military conquest or national security, he would have secretly shared his ideas with his own national leaders). Message edited by the author on Apr 09, 2009 - 22:44 Message edited by the author on Apr 09, 2009 - 22:58

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 74 Apr 10, 2009 - 03:40    There is a reason why blacks are raping each other in the streets in South Africa. They too fought for equal protection under the law. They attempted to ally themselves with an institution which is a) violent and b) an enemy to the black race. They succeeded. In South Africa, biracial "Coloreds" are safely segregated from other blacks. I'm not normally in favor of such divide and conquer techniques, but the nation's conditions are so savage that they would be destroyed otherwise. However, some biracial people have more African features, and are considered indigenous blacks. Blacks' peace efforts landed them in this boat in the first place, so their best bet is to have their bleeding-heart white fathers killed, and use the money they inherit to buy their safety. If they're smart they can figure out a way to kill them without getting caught.

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 75 Apr 10, 2009 - 23:15    ...In fact, that's how Britain conquered India. The British military was supposedly originally there to protect India's king and country from surrounding enemies. Instead they plundered the nation blue, kicked the natives' behinds left and right, and turned them against each other. They still have not fully recovered, because they failed to uproot the original cause. So in a way, both the Democrats and the Republicans fought against blacks during the Civil Rights Movement. The Democrats devised this treacherous Equal Protection bill, while the Republicans took a more straightforward approach, attempting to stamp out blacks' economic advancement. There is nothing worse than to have two enemies who appear to be fighting each other, but are actually both fighting you. The Civil Rights Movement was especially anti-black female. Men derive a sense of pride having legal rights in their nation, while women are more interested in having friends they can trust. It's called VIRTUE. Message edited by the author on Apr 10, 2009 - 23:28 Message edited by the author on Apr 10, 2009 - 23:33

Evelyn Collaborator Registered: Sep 2008 Post Number: 76 Apr 11, 2009 - 15:25    I am going to rant again about the biracial girl who demonstrated in the Civil Rights Movement. For most people of her ethnicity, integration is more than a political ideal. It has personal significance. By divulging her innermost secrets to the enemy in conflict, this girl robbed her own women of all their honor. This is a subtle issue, but it led to a multitude of huge and obvious problems. Without a basic sense of honor, we lose our ability to love ourselves and others unconditionally. Moreover, others are free to treat us with enormous disrespect. Like similarly yellow and tan-colored Asians, honor is very important to biracial people. It is more important than bravery, loyalty, or any of the other dubious virtues this girl demonstrated. However, unlike Asians, biracial people are members of another and more powerful race than we, and are therefore limited in our ability to make independent decisions. We are also typically a little dumber than Asians, and so go about pursuing what is important to us in the wrong way. Moreover, phenotypic differences between biracial people lead them to become indifferent to one another's welfare, as we do not all sink or swim together.

Page 1 2 3 4

Home - Search - New - Web Guide: Ecology, Solidarity, Personal Growth, Social Change, Countries ... Shopping Guide: Books, DVD, Music ... - Espaņol - Contents, Index, Random - Archive - Board - Donate, About

Martin Luther King: 3 - Message Board - People in Action http://peopleinaction.com/board/2/1338.html