I hate being black

>operating on what "works in the real world" instead of on what is right.
Ultimately whatever you mean by "works inow the real world" is a logical means to an illogical end. No matter what goal you have, it was chosen arbitrarily. The only right goal is righteousness itself.

>implying unprincipled men get anyway in life.

How would be some idea of righteousness be any less arbitrarily? And why would be the nature of how it was chosen even matter?

>get anyway in life
Seems like a needlessly subjective wording in attempt to disqualify all the powerful people.

Well first is identifying why you hate being black, why do you hate being black? Try and list as many reasons as possible.

i'm black too op

being black sucks, you will live your entire life black and there is nothing you can do about it(except do what micheal jackson did i guess)

Doesn't matter. Stop taking Jow Forums seriously and man up OP. It's just color

What's up my negro

t. White Nigga (It's cool I was Knighted)

Its really not "just color" when it affects the day to day life of us

You mean Nighted

Shouldn't the dislike be focused on the people/institution that makes it more than a colour then?

Such as liberals? Sure

pay your damn child support tyrone and you can turn white again

One of the proudest moments in my life, man.

Liberals tend to be the "I am colour-blind" fags.

Attached: guesswho.jpg (300x225, 20K)

I get the feeling more and more everyday that people who say shit like this don't actually know or speak to anybody who is in the group they make such broad generalizations about. Its amazing how many people have such sure opinions about "liberals" or "conservatives" who don't actually know anything about them other than what they read on Facebook.

Liberals tend to make it racial thing every time something happens. They might pretend to be colorblind but in fact it's them who are causing racial hatred.

>it's them who are causing racial hatred.
Do you actually believe this or is this bait?

100% not bait. Have you seen any news at all? For example CNN black child got shot by cops or black thugs robbed store. They are completly out of their mind. Racists to the bone.

Oh jeez. Ok. So let me get this straight, you believe that if Thanos snapped his mighty glove and got rid of all the liberals that racial hatred would be gone? That all of the deep south, rich, white evangelical conservatives would welcome minorities with open arms and racism would be over?

yes

Just to clarify one more time this isn't bait, right? If you're fucking with me please let me know.

What the kek.

Im not. Im dead serious. Liberals are biggest racists on this planet.

Oh dear. I'm not sure what to do with this, user.

>"black child got shot by cops" is racist
>"we don't want no negros around here" isn't racist
An interesting way to view it.

Holy shit, you took this too far. I, a liberal-hating conservative, think you took this too far.

Wait, one more question. So when "liberals" (I'm not even quite sure who all that includes but lets just go with that for now) talk about racial incidences happening are they always just making it up? Like, do you believe that racism doesn't exist anywhere but in the minds of liberals? That nobody is racist and racist things never happen but then liberals come along and make it racist? Do you ever see a news story or anything and think they could possible be right about race being a factor or do you think they're wrong 100% of the time?

Move to Canada where nobody cares?

Of course you are just brainwashed liberal who thinks you are the good one

Yes "black child shot by white cop" is stirring racial hatred.

Sure you are sweetie cutie.

>Yes "black child shot by white cop" is stirring racial hatred.
I'm very curious. Could you explain how you think this stirs racial hatred?

>Yes "black child shot by white cop" is stirring racial hatred.
You didn't address the other part.
>Sure you are sweetie cutie.
>all conservaties think the same
>using "sweetie", even ironically

So how would you prefer the news to address racially motivated murders? Or should it be white washed, so no one gets offended?

Also how are conservatives less racist?

>Also how are conservatives less racist?
The issue I'm trying to get to the heart of is his definition of racism. I'm thinking that is where we're fundamentally diverging. I'm trying to figure out whether or not he thinks racism even exists anywhere else and how or why he believes talking about race is tantamount to racism.

Blacks will hate whites more. CNN dont report "black cop shot white X". Liberals are completly nuts. Out of their mind racists. They are dividing this country.

Okay sweetie

It should be reported both ways and not only one. Also consirvatives say as it is and are trying to make black comunity better. They wont blatantly go and pretend that nothing is happening and everything is fine.

Go to Africa and reap the benefits of being one of the few people there without a room temperature IQ

I hate cuckolds like you more than the leftists
Grow a spine

>It should be reported both ways and not only one.
How can you report a racially motivated murder both ways?

>Also consirvatives say as it is and are trying to make black comunity better.
Coming up with more ways to imprison blacks and take their right to vote sounds like an interesting way to help.

>Blacks will hate whites more. CNN dont report "black cop shot white X". Liberals are completly nuts. Out of their mind racists. They are dividing this country.

You didn't answer my previous question. Do you think that race never plays a role in these shootings or these events? Also, do you not think being disproportionately imprisoned or shot has anything to do with black attitudes towards white people? Like, before news existed do you not think racism existed?

>CNN dont report "black cop shot white X"
I hate to throw a wrench in our discussion but that isn't true. The police officer who shot the unarmed white woman who called the police was black. The guy who just murdered 3 police at a gas station was just black. They reported on those with the same language.

Granted, racism is not nearly as rampant as libs make it seem, but surely you do not believe all conservatives are not racist? As that is what it seems you believe in, so far. Also, what do you think racism is? I'm dead serious in these questions.

> coming up with freeing slaves
yes all racists

>current republican party has ANY connection with the one from the past beyond the name and logo
Is that what Burger education does to you?

Oh boy. You do know that Democrats and Republicans essentially switched platforms in the 1800's right? Also, are you at all aware of the events that followed the Emancipation Proclamation or do you think that it was all just sunshine and rainbows for black people up until now?

> anger in it's pure form
kek get angry history decided you are on the wrong side

>Granted, racism is not nearly as rampant as libs make it seem
I find statements like these a bit odd. Unless you are a minority I find it difficult to believe that you somehow have a better barometer for the "levels" of racism than they do? I find it similar to telling a blind guy that he isn't as blind as he says he is and he's probably just exaggerating. I'm curious as to how you think you know.

You managed to make even less sense than before. That's something.

Also what the fucking fuck is with this slow captchas from time to time. Google needs to sort their shit out.

Anger? No I just payed attention in history class.

It's a neocon. Basically the most pathetic form of NPC imaginable, adopting every aspect of leftist 'morality' and then pretending you're conservative by being more liberal than your opponent. E.g, "dems are the REAL racists" or "men and women are ALREADY equal, therefore feminism is bad because of special privileges".

Reminder that white nationalists opposed slavery from the beginning because it undercut poor white farmers. If the actual "racists" had their way, chattel slavery wouldn't have happened on anywhere near the scale it did. Same thing in South Africa with apartheid--the purist faction wanted separate sovereign states, but they were overruled by greedy industrialists drunk on cheap labor. You're conversing with a footsoldier of that kind of industrialist, and both of you, I'd wager, have been conditioned to see white autonomy and white communities as a common evil. That's how they keep their power.

>How can you report a racially motivated murder both ways?

They should report Black killed white X and not only Whites killed black X or hispanic X.

>Coming up with more ways to imprison blacks and take their right to vote sounds like an interesting way to help.

Nope conservatives are actually trying to prevent this.

>Do you think that race never plays a role in these shootings or these events?

It does but they should report hate crime both ways. Not only "white shot x black x" but also "black/hispanic killed x people in white family"

>Also, do you not think being disproportionately imprisoned or shot has anything to do with black attitudes towards white people?

Liberals ingnore black comunity problems this is why the blacks are lead to bad path and end up in prison. Conservatives dont ignore this problem and are actually trying to help them. This is also why black crime rate gained more traction in liberal ruling than in convservative one.

> Like, before news existed do you not think racism existed?

Yes racism existed before. So?

> paid attention in history
> gets angry at history
weird stuff
> rage
also it's to prevent spamming by actual people

>Nope conservatives are actually trying to prevent this.
>Conservatives dont ignore this problem and are actually trying to help them.
Could you explain how you think they're trying to help minorities?

>Yes racism existed before. So?
Well because you're claiming that biased liberal news reporting is the cause for racial hatred and you said earlier that if liberals were gone than racism would be gone. With that being the case I'm just curious as to what you believed caused racial hatred and racism before the news and modern liberalism existed.

>you have to feel racism in the flesh to tell things as they are
Sure thing. But you do know that's not how it works, right? Even if it were as much, there are blacks and other "minorities" that call bullshit on things like BLM.

I'm not sure what being angry has to do with the fact that you're saying is 100% false and literally 10 seconds on Google can provide you with the evidence. The modern day conservative party did not free the slaves. That is incorrect. The Republicans and Democrats switched platforms in the 1800's. This is historical fact. Where did you learn all of this?

>there are blacks and other "minorities" that call bullshit on things like BLM.
Who are usually a minority in their own community. Wonder why.

Besides, the data is clear. Of course one can argue about the effectivity of BLM but the people who do, rarely have any better suggestions.

>Could you explain how you think they're trying to help minorities?

By not ignoring their problems like Liberals do because they think we are all equal in terms of culture and mental performance.

>With that being the case I'm just curious as to what you believed caused racial hatred and racism before the news and modern liberalism existed

Country wasnt divided back then as it is now. Racism wasnt so rampant. Blacks were segregated.

>rarely have any better suggestions.
Racial Balkanization of America, leaving the coastal areas as multiracial cesspits. No wypipo = no police brutality. Let the blacks police themselves.

>Racism wasnt so rampant. Blacks were segregated.
Kek.

I'm not claiming 100% truth or 100% false either way. I'm sure its over represented and under represented in a myriad of ways. I'm just saying I find it bizarre when people say racism is either worse or better than they say it is with literally zero way of actually knowing.

>Even if it were as much, there are blacks and other "minorities" that call bullshit on things like BLM.
I do hope you know that being a minority is not like being on a sports team. They don't actually all share one ideology. Believe it or not there are some black people that either don't believe in or don't fit into the civil rights movement. If you've ever seen The Boondocks you would know that Uncle Ruckus is a wildly exaggerated but accurate representation of the awareness minorities have of the percentage of their population that doesn't believe in racism or inequality and sees their own skin as a kind of curse rather than a unifying trait.

>Racism wasn't so rampant
>Blacks were segregated
It's clear we have different perceptions of racism

Completely revamping the country instead of educating the police and making them more accountable doesn't sound too reasonable.

>By not ignoring their problems like Liberals do because they think we are all equal in terms of culture and mental performance.
I want specific policies, not just kind of generalized talking points. How do you specifically feel the conservative party is trying to help minority communities.

>Country wasnt divided back then as it is now. Racism wasnt so rampant. Blacks were segregated.
Wow.

Great idea... Do you have any way of putting it into practice, though?

>It's clear we have different perceptions of racism

Racism is discriminating someone based on their race if im not mistaken. Do you have any different preception of this?

>I want specific policies, not just kind of generalized talking points. How do you specifically feel the conservative party is trying to help minority communities.

To sergegate black children into schools with black majority children so they can hire special teachers who deal with black culture problems and tackle it in roots.

he is talking a basic concept
> the main people who make things about race would be gone
> ergo the problem ( of people making things about race)would be gone
yes republicans freed slaves this is a well documented fact
jump around the fact and spin it how you will but the fact will remain true

>Do you have any different preception of this?
Basically, no. But what you said goes in direct opposition to what you said before, as by segregating, you are discriminating someone based on their race.

>yes republicans freed slaves
The republican party did, when they had a certain platform. Their platform changed completely, why would it matter what people who used the same name did?

Racism is a nebulous term. I take it he means in the sense of racial hatred, and he's right--if people aren't in close proximity, there is much less cause for conflict. If "racism" simply means acknowledging race as real in some form, then it's too broad to mean anything.

You're never going to completely eliminate racial bias (and it's arguable that you can't eliminate it anyway, given the persisting implicit bias that comes from interaction)--that's why there are """hate crimes""" even in Sweden. But if there aren't any minorities in an area, you can't possibly oppress them, because there isn't anyone there to oppress. Good fences make good neighbors.

'Democratically'? No. Having an electorate constantly at each other's throats is far too valuable to those in power.

I am a mixed manlet and hated myself for a while, but I started working hard to become someone I could look in the mirror and appreciate

>But what you said goes in direct opposition to what you said before, as by segregating, you are discriminating someone based on their race

How come?

>To sergegate black children into schools with black majority children so they can hire special teachers who deal with black culture problems and tackle it in roots.
That already happens in some neighborhoods of New York, if I'm not mistaken. Guess if whites are welcome there? History tells us alienation leads only to more alienation, and not cooperation.

>Guess if whites are welcome there? History tells us alienation leads only to more alienation, and not cooperation

So you mean that black can be racist against whites?

If you only read the OP, it's time to get out. This shit devolved fast.
>... as by segregating, you are discriminating someone based on their race

>You're never going to completely eliminate racial bias
Nor is there any need for something so drastic when talking about the police doing their job. Police brutality isn't an issue in any other developed country.

>But if there aren't any minorities in an area, you can't possibly oppress them, because there isn't anyone there to oppress.
Given how connected the world is, you don't need to have someone next to you to fuck up their life.

I still dont know what are you implying. Elaborate?

>he is talking a basic concept
Yes, but this is assuming that the things they are "making" about race weren't about race to begin with. The concept that liberals invent racism in situations where no racism exists only makes sense in a world where racism doesn't exist. It seems strange to imply that simply interjecting the topic of race into incidences is what makes the incident racist and not the actual incident itself. Its also strange to imply that "making things about race" is the problem and not the fact that in the current reality we live in, a lot of things are actually about race.

>yes republicans freed slaves this is a well documented fact
Please read a history book sometime. For the third time, the Republicans and Democrats switched platforms in the 1800's. In the early 1800's the modern day Democrats were called the Republicans and the modern day Republicans were called the Democrats. The party that freed the slaves were in fact called the Republicans but the 1800's Republican party is a direct descendant of the modern day Democratic party. Essentially the Dems and Repubs switched name tags back in the 1800's. So yes, a group called the Republicans freed the slaves but the only Republican thing about them was their title. Conservative ideology did not free the slaves. Liberal ideology did.

youtu.be/zmYry-uzLbc

Can we all agree that black women are terrible?

Of course they can. I'm not the liberal(s) here. Blacks can and will be racist to whites and vice versa, if the conditions are right.
I literally do not know if I can be more clear than that. Pick child A and look at its color. Is it white? Then put it at the front of the bus. Else, put it at the front.
What characteristic did I use in order to treat child A in some way or another? The child's color. Is this clear enough, or am I being trolled?

Meant to say "else, put it at the back". Apologies.

> in the current reality we live in, a lot of things are actually about race..
and this is why racism exists people create the racism for no other reason than to make everything about race
> liberal ideology did
actually conservative ideology was basically god isn't a fan of slavery

But the child A with x skin color ride bust with the same child who have same skin color. That what segregation means.

Am i mistaken? Or being trolled?

Stop getting all of your opinions/worldviews from Jow Forums and I assure you this will be much less of an issue

>this is why racism exists people create the racism for no other reason than to make everything about race
Take a step back. The entire concept of human races is pure meme after we killed our Neanderthal friends.

>I literally do not know if I can be more clear than that. Pick child A and look at its color. Is it white?

WTF? Are you racistic? Why should the child always be white?

> the entire concept of race is a meme
obviously that's where the problems start it's never cop shoots man

They were a different species, not a different race. Look at dogs today. All canis familiaris, yet some are big, others small, agressive or docile. Yet they can reproduce and produce fertile descendants.
So you propose we just continue going around in circles, then?

>History tells us alienation leads only to more alienation
If they're in the same state and competing for the same resources. If the existence of one had no effect or drastically reduced effect on the existence of another, i.e. in separate states, I would argue that the overall effect would be positive for both.

>Police brutality isn't an issue in any other developed country.
No other developed country has a sizeable black population across its territory, nor do they have anywhere near the level of gun rights that the US does. It's not realistic to expect police to be armed British-style with truncheons when you have urban gangs that have easy access to assault rifles.
>inb4guncontrol
First of all, it's against the consititution to outright ban it, and secondly, even if you did, this country is still awash in weapons, and driving it underground wouldn't change that criminals are much more likely to have firearms than in Europe.

>you don't need to have someone next to you to fuck up their life.
Talking about economics and imperialism is a separate issue, but suffice it to say that close proximity is never going to help.

>The entire concept of human races is pure meme
Here we go...
I was waiting for this dogmatic trash to get hauled out.

>>So you propose we just continue going around in circles, then?

I guess so. But since you are unable to explain or debunk anything properly and you are here just to troll me i guess im leaving you with your stupid ideology. Cya racist :3

Cya fucktard. Learn to read and interpret text next time you're taking part in a discussion. It spares people's time.

>yet some are big, others small, agressive or docile
Hence no relation to human ethnicities.