Colin Powell (1 Viewer)

[el caliente]

While certainly it’s not proper to speak ill of the dead, Powell had an impressive career, and IMHO is the closest thing this era has had to Alexander Hamilton (debate that among yourselves).

As great a man as he was, some people couldn’t stop taking pot shots at him even on the day of his death.

 

[Paul]

Literally just linked to an article - from the professor you referred to - that starts by asking someone how their ID card classifies them (and it classified them as white), repeatedly discusses the different ways people are classified by skin colour in Cuba, and quoted someone saying "in Cuba, there are many different ways of referring to the racial category of black—there are forty-four different ways, in fact," Paul.

You make a good point as to why the ID says white. Do not forget that slavery lasted much longer in Cuba and as in any other colonized nation the light skin is seen as desirable. This also happens among black Americans. American slave masters were aware that people with a low percent of black DNA would try to pass as white and they designed the one drop rule. I believe there is no one drop rule in Cuba. That is why the ID says white. Lastly white in the USA means pure North European. White in Latin America does not follow that definition. That definition was created by slave owners in America,

There is probably an infinite way of classifying people according to looks Robf. White people do it too with regards to looks among themselves.

And recognising that racial categories exist culturally is not racist. They do exist. You can argue it would be nice if they didn't, but they do. Recognising they do exist allows us to understand the impact of different things on different people though, enabling us to understand what's happening and why, and attempt to actually engage with it and improve matters.

Recognition is undeniable, but classifying people according to phenotype is racism. And once you classify people according to group-------- division and tribalism are not far away. That is why America is so divided.

Whereas pretending they don't exist doesn't make them go away, as can be seen in France, Japan, Cuba, or whichever place you're going to move onto next. It's a fantasy.

Nice straw man Robf. I say the differences are ignored and every person is treated as an individual rather than as a member of a group. As soon as you treat someone as a member of a group you have racism. When persons are evaluated as individuals racism goes away.

I'll also note it's a fantasy beloved of bigots who would love nothing more than for everyone to stop talking about racism, pretend it's gone away, and just let them carry on with it.

Another straw man Robf. A comment that was not needed in your argument.

And here's the thing, again. We're talking about unequal outcomes between groups here, specifically, racial groups.

And you're, again, saying, "It does not work because humans exist in a spectrum of competence and talent."

Yes, equal outcomes are impossible because there is no equality. Humans exist in a spectrum of talent. Is this something you fail to grasp? I will admit that people that descend from slaves have a much harder time as a group. However, at the individual level anything is possible. There is no such thing as a collective mind.

And in that context, there are only two possibilities: you're arguing the unequal outcomes between those racial groups exist because one group is more towards one end of the 'spectrum of competence and talent' and others are more at the other end, or, you think that while a spectrum exists, racial group has no bearing on where anyone is on it, in which case it has absolutely nothing whatsoever to do with what we're talking about since it would have no bearing whatsoever on unequal outcomes between racial groups.

You are falling for the trap of judging people as members of a group. For example as a group East Asians score higher than blacks in SAT exams. However at the individual level there are plenty of blacks that outscore East Asians. That is why you judge people as individuals and forget the stats of the group.

So to put it bluntly, you're either being explicitly racist, or you're babbling incoherently. So which is it? Be really specific.

As a typical religionist of the extreme left you are calling me a heretic because I do not accept your gospel. That is why your religion is dangerous Robf.

 

[Paul]

I don't know, man... Rob did a pretty good job of exposing you as an intellectual fraud. I don't know if me kicking you in the ribs while you're down is going to help.

Once again the intellectual giant CM fails to post something because he is too shy to show off his intelligence.

 

[el caliente]

Leave us Cubans alone, we’re talking about good Jamaicans (the Powell’s) and a bad Jamaican (Trump).

Castro was cool with all races, as long as those races liked starving and being used as cannon fodder. That hijo de puta.

 

[Paul]

Leave us Cubans alone, we’re talking about good Jamaicans (the Powell’s) and a bad Jamaican (Trump).

Castro was cool with all races, as long as those races liked starving and being used as cannon fodder. That hijo de puta.

Castro had a ton of charisma and legend says he could give a 4 hour speech. Cubans are among the top most successful Latin Americans in the USA. Jamaicans are also very successful. They run circles around black Americans. Why is that?

¡Trump es un hijo de la grán puta!

 

[J-DONK]

What do you believe his role was in that massacre?

As for his "willful delusions" to the Iraq war, are you saying the man who put a stop to the 1st Gulf War allowed himself to be deceived into a 2nd war?

The first war was stopped because he understood what occupying Iraq would take and that no one wanted to pay that price! Back then, there were some of the same voices calling for the full invasion of Iraq and he resisted them and convinced POTUS that their objectives have been met. From what I have read about him, he has always put service first and for him to serve over 35 years in the armed forces of a country that did not fully accept him, I find it completely admirable.

I couldn't do it, I was well on track to being promoted to E-9 until the 2008 Presidential campaign and my eyes were truly open to what this country thinks of people who look like me. The talk between some of the people I considered friends became so ignorant, until then, I thought that as long as I worked hard and was good at my job nothing else would matter, it became clear to me that was very a naïve mindset. I then began to look around and realize that many of the black SNCO's were move to more support positions outside of leadership, the ones who remained in those leadership positions had to fight to do so!

After listening to all the negative whispers about Obama and being told that I would be moved to back-shop (a support position) once I returned from special duty (USAF 1st Sgt), I bailed out!

He clearly went along with the coverup of My Lai. That's well documented. It's not about any belief.

I guess I should have been clear. For some reason you are talking about the first Iraq war, we both know I'm talking about the 2nd. The speech he gave arguing for the removal of Saddam, and that AQ was in Iraq. He did that despite privately having major reservations. He even characterized his actions during that period as a "blot on his record".

What does his skin color have to do about any of this? Why are you injecting race in the discussion at all? Should he not be lumped in with the rest of the Bush administration because he is black?

 

[cuddlemonkey]

You are falling for the trap of judging people as members of a group. For example as a group East Asians score higher than blacks in SAT exams. However at the individual level there are plenty of blacks that outscore East Asians. That is why you judge people as individuals and forget the stats of the group.

Cubans are among the top most successful Latin Americans in the USA. Jamaicans are also very successful. They run circles around black Americans. Why is that?

Make up your damn mind.

 

[DJ1BigTymer]

He clearly went along with the coverup of My Lai. That's well documented. It's not about any belief.

I guess I should have been clear. For some reason you are talking about the first Iraq war, we both know I'm talking about the 2nd. The speech he gave arguing for the removal of Saddam, and that AQ was in Iraq. He did that despite privately having major reservations. He even characterized his actions during that period as a "blot on his record".

What does his skin color have to do about any of this? Why are you injecting race in the discussion at all? Should he not be lumped in with the rest of the Bush administration because he is black?

I was talking about the Man he was and why so many chose to recognize his accomplishments and his patriotism, not the caricature that those extremist on both sides choose to focus on. You claimed his actions as SoS were "willful", leaving no room for him to be deceived by bad intel. Even then, after his UN speech, he advocated for diplomacy in lieu of invasion but he would support the POTUS decision.

What does his skin color have to do about any of this? Why are you injecting race in the discussion at all? Should he not be lumped in with the rest of the Bush administration because he is black?

If that's what you got out of what I said, that's on you, not me.

 

[Paul]

Make up your damn mind.

Groups have tendencies. Jamaicans do well as a group. At the individual level you may find Jamaicans that are not doing well. Are you able to distinguish the difference? Do you understand why is better to judge people individually and not as members of a group.

A talented person is talented regardless of the number of of people with no talent that belong to his group.
If we ever decide to give up group ID politics and judge everybody as an individual racism ends.

 

[cuddlemonkey]

Groups have tendencies. Jamaicans do well as a group. At the individual level you may find Jamaicans that are not doing well. Are you able to distinguish the difference? Do you understand why is better to judge people individually and not as members of a group.

A talented person is talented regardless of the number of of people with no talent that belong to his group.
If we ever decide to give up group ID politics and judge everybody as an individual racism ends.

The only one here actively grouping people is you, and it's always along racial lines.

 

[RobF]

You make a good point as to why the ID says white. Do not forget that slavery lasted much longer in Cuba and as in any other colonized nation the light skin is seen as desirable. This also happens among black Americans. American slave masters were aware that people with a low percent of black DNA would try to pass as white and they designed the one drop rule. I believe there is no one drop rule in Cuba. That is why the ID says white. Lastly white in the USA means pure North European. White in Latin America does not follow that definition. That definition was created by slave owners in America,

There is probably an infinite way of classifying people according to looks Robf. White people do it too with regards to looks among themselves.

Recognition is undeniable, but classifying people according to phenotype is racism. And once you classify people according to group-------- division and tribalism are not far away. That is why America is so divided.

Nice straw man Robf. I say the differences are ignored and every person is treated as an individual rather than as a member of a group. As soon as you treat someone as a member of a group you have racism. When persons are evaluated as individuals racism goes away.



Another straw man Robf. A comment that was not needed in your argument.

Yes, equal outcomes are impossible because there is no equality. Humans exist in a spectrum of talent. Is this something you fail to grasp? I will admit that people that descend from slaves have a much harder time as a group. However, at the individual level anything is possible. There is no such thing as a collective mind.

You are falling for the trap of judging people as members of a group. For example as a group East Asians score higher than blacks in SAT exams. However at the individual level there are plenty of blacks that outscore East Asians. That is why you judge people as individuals and forget the stats of the group.

As a typical religionist of the extreme left you are calling me a heretic because I do not accept your gospel. That is why your religion is dangerous Robf.

Replying in the All About Racism thread, because we don't have to let Paul derail every thread on here.

 

[MT15]

Groups have tendencies. Jamaicans do well as a group. At the individual level you may find Jamaicans that are not doing well. Are you able to distinguish the difference? Do you understand why is better to judge people individually and not as members of a group.

A talented person is talented regardless of the number of of people with no talent that belong to his group.
If we ever decide to give up group ID politics and judge everybody as an individual racism ends.

Yet you are the one continually bringing up group tendencies. Honestly, I think Rob is right about why you do that.

 

[Paul]

Yet you are the one continually bringing up group tendencies. Honestly, I think Rob is right about why you do that.

A personal attack is not an argument MT. Groups have tendencies. Being a liberal does not mean one has to ignore reality. What really matters is to judge people as individuals and not as members of a group.

Do you have anything to contribute? It seems that many resorts to personal attacks when they cannot form an argument. I will assume this was a slip.
BTW, I give credit to Robf for putting forth an argument.

 

[samiam5211]

Castro had a ton of charisma and legend says he could give a 4 hour speech. Cubans are among the top most successful Latin Americans in the USA. Jamaicans are also very successful. They run circles around black Americans. Why is that?

¡Trump es un hijo de la grán puta!

Cuban immigrants are given a much better start in the US than other immigrants from Latin America.

They are immediately given legal status, and can become citizens five years after the set foot in the US. They are also able to use public assistance programs immediately. Immigrants from other Latin American countries are subject to the public charge inadmissibility.

Cuban Americans do better than Honduran Americans because they get to have socialism from the day they step foot on the US.

This isn’t meant as an attack against Cubans, I’m just sick of seeing people use Cubans to shirt on other refugee populations from Latin America.

 

[Paul]

Cuban immigrants are given a much better start in the US than other immigrants from Latin America.

They are immediately given legal status, and can become citizens five years after the set foot in the US. They are also able to use public assistance programs immediately. Immigrants from other Latin American countries are subject to the public charge inadmissibility.

Cuban Americans do better than Honduran Americans because they get to have socialism from the day they step foot on the US.

This isn’t meant as an attack against Cubans, I’m just sick of seeing people use Cubans to shirt on other refugee populations from Latin America.

I agree

However, they do better economically than Puerto Ricans who have full citizenship status.

 

[SystemShock]

Castro had a ton of charisma and legend says he could give a 4 hour speech.

That's no legend. I heard them , in Cuba. he did it every Tuesday at 2pm (IIRC) for 3 decades.

[Cubans] run circles around black Americans. Why is that?

No, they don't.

 

[el caliente]

Cuban immigrants are given a much better start in the US than other immigrants from Latin America.

They are immediately given legal status, and can become citizens five years after the set foot in the US. They are also able to use public assistance programs immediately. Immigrants from other Latin American countries are subject to the public charge inadmissibility.

Cuban Americans do better than Honduran Americans because they get to have socialism from the day they step foot on the US.

This isn’t meant as an attack against Cubans, I’m just sick of seeing people use Cubans to shirt on other refugee populations from Latin America.

It’s true, Cubans are different from most other LAs, we find a way to thrive in this environment.

 

[Paul]

It’s true, Cubans are different from most other LAs, we find a way to thrive in this environment.

Exactly!

Latin Americans have different success rates in America. It depends on the country of origin.
Immigrants from Africa and Asia also have different levels of success according to where they come from.
Americans of European ancestry have different levels of success according the country of origin.

 

[samiam5211]

It’s true, Cubans are different from most other LAs, we find a way to thrive in this environment.

Possibly, but Cubans are given a huge safety net when they arrive in the US that others do not have.

Cubans may be awesome, but there isn't any doubt that the safety net also helps them excel ahead of other immigrant groups.

I believe that we should give all immigrant groups access to those same benefits.