Data scientist DESTROYS the BLM narrative
- Thread starter Boilermaker03
- Start date
Nobody is talking about removing racism and slavery from history books either. Get a clue.
You've said this a few times, but the plaques around these statues would tell a different story. Where are you getting that idea?
Even if the bold statement is remotely true, that doesn't mean we should erase our history. The plaques actuall give very good information. It's important to remember our bad history so we don't repeat it.
Even if the bold statement is true, you do understand which party would have allowed that to happen right?
And the only people that bring up white privilege are white people mainly. BNI is not black he's as white as snow.
I thought your boys were in high school?
You claimed not too long ago that they reason they weren't getting as much playing time on the court was because of their skin color. Did you not say that?
I feel bad for your boys. They're being brought up to view their skin color as a detriment and excuse for victimhood.
So now, regardless of the cops race or my race, me getting a ticket is simply because I broke the law and it was deserved?
But, I thought the police were inherently racist? I thought they targeted black people?
If my skin color were different, do you think the white cop would have given me a ticket and the black cop given a warning?
Most people killed by the cops were doing they shouldn't have been doing in the first place. Poor decisions lead to poor outcomes. Make enough poor decisions and it's eventually going to lead to a really poor outcome.
I can't believe you care more about criminals than you do about school children who get gunned down on the south side of Chicago with surprising regularity. Sad....
Not breaking the law is the key ingredient here.
But, BNI still thinks more unarmed blacks are killed by the cops than unarmed whites. Data and facts don't matter. He's gonna die on that hill no matter what.
I think the black history we need to be learning about and discussing is:
Why are over 70% of black babies born to single mothers?
Why are over 55% of violent crimes committed by blacks who only comprise 12% of the general population?
Why is the leading cause of death among black males age 15-35, murder at the hands of other black males?
And what about the other races? Blacks weren't the only ones that were slaves and some were slaves longer.
And we keep praising BLM for all the burning, looting and murdering when they are nothing more than a terrorist organization filled with unhinged white people and felons.
When they cover the topic of slavery in school, do they teach the students who originally sold the black Africans to the Europeans in the first place, or is that part skipped over?
Districts are trying to ban books like these all over. Some successful, some not.
Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks Books Among Those Banned in PA School
The Central York School District said "a significant portion" of district parents complained over the content of the material.
www.newsweek.com
How is that BS. Aren't they banning CRT all over the place? CRT is not even taught in K-12. But they banning parts of black history that are ugly under the guise of CRT cause they say it makes their kids feel bad about themselves.
That was years ago. You apparently chimed in a discussion I was having with someone else.
I'm surprised that y'all accept unarmed white people getting killed by police, if that indeed is true.
Yep. But do you understand what party currently likes these statues and monuments and refuse to take them down? Do you understand the what party of the last president that was against renaming the military bases?
I would just find it interesting, but not surprising, that you would make that claim.
As an employer, that's a really dangerous path to put your boys on. They're going to be getting work reviews for the next 30+ years, and whenever they get one that's not positive or down right poor, they're probably going to think their skin color had something to do with it (and you'll probably agree with them).
I have never heard one person metion books about MLK or Rosa Parks. Would not surprise me one bit that the administrators pushing the CRT books added those other books to make the parents look crazy. The people pushing the CRT crap don't give a rip about being fair or truthful. They will do anything to get their way.Districts are trying to ban books like these all over. Some successful, some not.
Martin Luther King, Jr., Rosa Parks Books Among Those Banned in PA School
The Central York School District said "a significant portion" of district parents complained over the content of the material.
Bullshit. You know this is bullshit because it's been proven to you over and over, but you refuse to listen to anyone else. The schools themselves are calling it CRT. They are pushing this hard. Nobody is asking for real history to be removed. Just the CRT bs.
If you are talking about teaching white kids to hate themselves, whatever that is it is not CRT. Even if they call it CRT, it ain’t CRT. Texas has been doing this for several years, way before this CRT talk, removing horrible events from history text books.
They are trying to remove real black history. I just told you about removing Rosa Parks books. Some of these districts call it CRT so that they can justify not teaching some of this history that they claim make white kids feel bad. Again not CRT. CRT is the framework of how racism interjects with the legal system. Basically systemic racism. Nothing to do with making people feel bad. Real CRT is ONLY taught in law schools and some grad schools.
You didn't answer my question.
You want black history taught, presumably, in order to provide some sort of context as to how blacks were treated in the past by whites is still manifested in the problems of black society today.
But, i ask, if we're talking black history, should the discussion also focus on the problems black society is faced with today? Specifically:
Why are over 70% of black babies born to single mothers?
Why are over 55% of violent crimes committed by blacks who only comprise 12% of the general population?
Why is the leading cause of death among black males age 15-35, murder at the hands of other black males?
Why do you keep asking me the same questions all the time? It's a good thing that you don't raise any horses.
Even though the history of blacks in America has had an impact of lives of current blacks, that is not my intention. Actually the lives of ALL people in America is based on the historical events that their family's history have endured.
Black history should be taught because like others have brought it up before, it is part of American history. I guarantee you have never heard of Benjamin Banneker, Garrett Morgan, George Washington Carver, or Louis Latimer and a whole lot of others like them. At the same time, Harriet Tubman, Nat Turner, the 3/5 compromise etc. should be taught. People don't know the real history behind Lincoln's Emancipation Proclamation which did not free anyone like we were taught in school. It was only a military document that only allowed the enslaved blacks in the Confederate states to come fight for the Union. Blacks in the northern states remained enslaved.
I have told you several times, if they want to discuss those social issues in a history class so be it. I don't have any problems I've also told you that those social issues would be and probably are discussed in a social studies or sociology class. A typical history teacher aren't qualified to discuss serious social issues. Or at least not at the depth the issues should be discussed.
Why does there have to be a "Black" history? Why can it just be American history as all encompassing?
Should Anglo-European history be segmented out?
How about Asian history?
Mexican/Hispanic?
Why does a persons skin color have to be identified in terms of what their historical contribution was?
Why can’t it be just American history? Because they leave a lot of stuff out like the aforementioned Emaciation Proclamation. In school they focused on the Gettysburg Address. Said nothing about it not freeing anyone. Black History Month allows not only blacks but everyone that is interested in history that they may not have heard. And perhaps reiterate history that we all know about.
Should Anglo-Europeans, Asians, Hispanics history be segmented out? Perhaps. If you are going to tell the story in history class tell the entire story. They taught us in history class about the Europeans at the end of the 1800’s and early 1900’s coming to America through Ellis Island. They made it seem that everything was peachy. They left out how tough it was for each European ethnic group had it before they were accepted and assimilated into society. The Italians were even called the n-word depending on where they settled. Both the Italians and Irish for example had drawings depicting them as monkeys. History books don’t tell the entire story on how horrible Andrew Jackson was to the Native Americans when it came to the “Trail of Tears”. I don’t remember history class talking about putting the Japanese-AMERICANS into internment camps during WWII.
So yeah tell it all.
Listen. At some point you need to drop this charade and call it what the schools are calling it. If the school is calling it CRT, then why are you so hell bent in saying it isn't? Even if it's different than what the college course is, to say something isn't CRT when it clearly is being called that by the schools is strange to me.
All right, you tell me. As far as the schools that are calling it CRT. Are they teaching stuff that white people should be hated?
To an extent yes. They are teaching white kids that they are oppressors. How do you think the kids of color will look at those white kids?
That is exactly my point. If that what they are teaching then that is definitely NOT CRT. Several of these school districts are using the CRT excuse to remove black history that they don't like. 99.9% of people don't even know what CRT is.
This isn't ALL they are teaching in the name of CRT. This is just an aspect of it. Jesus man...
Hey BNI, I listened to a little Urban Radio last night, Joe Madison on Sirius around 9pm.
When they came out of commercial, they immediately, and I do mean Immediately, when on a tangent about voter suppression and preventing blacks from voting.
I'm still waiting for the first black person in this country, give me just 1, who met the local voting rules/laws and was denied the opportunity to vote.
However, I can see how you like Madison and Urban radio; the play the victimhood card very, very well.
Nice! Keep listening. You may not agree with 99% of the views but you will at least get the gist of the black perspective of the topics. That's what I do when I listen to the conservative "Patriot" channel.
No one said that the voter suppression laws stops blacks from voting. Other than Sunday voting these laws aren't targeted to just blacks. These laws are design disenfranchise democratic voters. The repub strategists realized that blacks and the dems like to vote absentee, mail in, drive by etc. So they restrict those. Plus these laws removed drop boxes in the more populated areas and added more in the rural areas. The laws don't stop, they make it harder to vote. The lines are and will he longer on voting day. The repubs know that they win elections when the return out is low. Therefore, if a few folks here and a few folks there want to sit it out because of the aforementioned then a precinct can be won here and there. Whether or not it works or will work, that is definitely the intent. Repub law makers have admitted to this way back when they first started doing this after the 2008 election.
You keep bringing up victimhood. The right wingers are the ones crying about being a victim when it comes to the false narrative of CRT. Whoa is me, my child will grow up hating themselves if they learn about black history. Even on this board crying that Black History Month is divisive. If there was such thing as Hispanic, Asian, Jewish etc. history month, I'll be all over it.
