Can We Stop This "non-Violence" is the Answer BS?
Options
Comments
-
You said whitey. You hate all white people.
Whitey = rich, racist, old white men.
Whitey doesnt mean the entire race when I say it.
If you a ? makin millions a year and not helpin out the poor, they are whiteys also -
because that's actually not what i am talking about. here's the quote: "...when the rednecks lost the white-house to a half-breed they went out an bought guns and bullets, formed rifle clubs, joined militias and bought as much ammunition as they could fit in their wrangler jeans."Janklow, why are you afraid to admit that these white dudes hate the fact that there is a ? in the White House? ... ? could have a noose around his neck and you would be like, " Well we should consider all angles of this before we just assume this is a lynching."
all that drama about guys rushing out and buying guns and ammunition has much to do with the expectation that Obama/congressional Democrats would push for restrictions on firearms. this is not ONLY about race (this kind of thing happens whenever gun control legislation seems eminent) and the part i QUOTED misses that. h-rap isn't about to acknowledge that not everything's about race, especially not this.
i am not afraid to admit there are a lot of racist white dudes that hate the fact that the president is black. why would i be? it is, sadly, a fact.
ps. if you're a long-time lurker, does it really seem like i would a) deny the existence of racist white folks or b) miss a chance to expound on firearms-related politics? because if you answered "no" to those, i don't know where you were lurking.
well, there was a peep from some people, but much of the love for this Tea Party stuff is hypocritical in that regard. still doesn't have much to do with my earlier post, though.GW trampled more civil liberties and spent money like it was pennies, and not a peep from these people. -
ps. if you're a long-time lurker, does it really seem like i would a) deny the existence of racist white folks or b) miss a chance to expound on firearms-related politics? because if you answered "no" to those, i don't know where you were lurking.
To be honest, I used to scroll past your posts because you always would have some scary looking person in your avi. -
Violence is only good when it can be employed effectively. Check the Hungarian revolution for what happens when violence is not enough.
Non-violence is only good when employed effectively. Check the Tiananmen square incident of 1989.
Non-violence has significant advantages over violence.
1. Relatively little need for physical logistics. You don't need bullets.
2. Isolates decision-makers from their support. The greatest strength of non-violence is its ability to sway the general population. It is revolting to the core of most people to see a non-resisting person assaulted. If decision-makers rely on violence to force compliance on a non-resisting popluation they almost always loss support of the general population.
3. Resistance tends to soften with age. In long campaigns spanning several years non-violence tends to become stronger the longer it is pursued.
4. Can produce win-win situations for all parties.
Violence has advantages as well
1. Capable of producing results on an exceeding short timeline. Victory on the battlefield can effect immediate change.
2. Employing violence can shift negociating stances in the short term
3. Effective even against entrenched ideas. Non-violence can alter these ideas, like religous views for instance, but tend to have a much harder time. Many religious wars have been fought due to this issue.
Both of these paths are effective but only when their strengths align with the assets a group has. Since non-violence has such a lower set of assets needs it tends to be the superior choice. -
are these really all equally successful examples?
its deeper than war
History teaches us that Dessalines and the Hatian revolution was successful in gainig Haiti's independence, sadly he was assassinated by an Uncle Tom mulatto. Haiti has suffered tremendously, and paid a heavy price for freedom but through violence towards the europeons they were able to free themselves from slavery.
History teaches us that the Mau Mau, and the Mau Mau rebellion was sucsessful because they were given land, better wages, and political representation after they used violence against the europeons.
Bandula in Berma is much more complex, that ? was a senseless massacre, they were outgunned and outmanned from the jump, but dying on the battlefeild defending your nation fighting alien imperialists is some heroic, romantic ish. LOL but seriously he was able to massacre many red-coats but ultimately his men lacked the bloodthirstiness they needed in order to out-slaughter the europeon.
Geronimo died a broken man who wished he never surrendered, and once again another example of an Uncle Tom Apache betraying him and helping the U.S capture him, he was succesful in slaughtering many pale-faces but his people ultimately lacked the savageness necessary to eliminate the europeon.
The romanticism of armed resistance aside, bloodshed is the only way for the landless to get land from the landlord.
i think there are some political nuances to this that you might be overlooking because they don't relate to race
[video]http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5189467n[/video]
http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5189467n
I have heard enough vitriol, code-words, and propaganda from the Nascar crowd, and seen enough interviews and documentaries to come to the conclusion that many whites hate Obama because his father was a Black Afrikan, and a Black family is in the "white"-house
History teaches us that gun sales reaching all time highs at two times in American history.....
1.) Post-slavery after African Americans were given their so-called freedom
2.) Post-election after Barack Obama was elected president
.....its only coincidence that the sales were highest in confederate states and middle america....hmmmmmmm just coincidence.
-
You all keep thinking I'm talking about some mass revolution (which would be great) but we're only 14 percent of the population (probably less once the Census results are in and the many black babies murdered in abortion clinic take its toll).
I'm asking why are whites taught that violence is OK and they teach their children about "the bombs bursting in air" but blacks are taught about the pacifist MLK and nothing about anybody else.
Why is it that when whites so much as THINK Obama is going to ? with them they instantly stock up on guns and form militias but stupid ? get shot by pigs and not one pig is dead the next day? Why even wait for a trial you know they gonna get off. The most powerful man in the world gets whites to form militias. But some low life pig makes ? march down the street singing ? spirituals.
Why is it that violence is good for them but not us? And why do you all accept it? -
the mau mau rebellion isn't a good argument against non-violence.
violence when you are the minority in numbers isn't a good idea, it could have worked in algeria and haiti but not in the us -
*SIIIIGH*
None of the responses tell me you people get what I mean. U all know I'm not talking about taking over right? Just making ? extremely uncomfortable for people to abuse and ? with you when all other methods fail (i.e. Court system, politics) -
Sometimes, Violence is a Required Response, sometimes It isnt..........Nelson Mandela needed to use violence, his Country was for all pracitcal purposes being invaded and the Natives were being held hostage.............Acts of Violence was the Only Response (It was worst there than it was over here). Other times, peace Does work Too, Ghandi Proved this, MLK proved peace was Effective too. Say what u want, but We wouldnt be in the Situation we Were now is not for the Apporach MLK used. Rite now i think the probelm lies in with us Not taking care of us, not Holdin down our Communites and ? .DarcSkies777 wrote: »Yeah and poor whites should just be content that the last 43 president's where white. So I guess ALL white people benefited from the mere color of the president's skin right? ? !
Black businesses weren't burned down and if they were it was accidental.
Also it's not "your own ? " if you dont own or benefit from those businesses. There is a Bank near my house. But I dont make a percentage so I'm not about to cry a river if it burns down and say "why'd they burn MY bank." Its not mine/ours if I/we dont get a benefit from it.
THis is why General Grant is on my list of Greatest presidents because he used violence to keep the KKK at bay. HE pretty much just rounded them muthafukkas up with Federal Troops and violence against blacks was next to none. THen Congress made him stop and........
VIolence seems to be the only language whites dont understand. And although KTULU was just being a smart ass he's right. Too many ? are lazy and are just happy with "a black president..." like thats going to keep pigs from shooting you when you're unarmed or make corporations hire you even though you qualify or make schools teach kids something they can actually use when out of HS.
Dumb ? .
Anyway, to Say neither is needed is Crazy, there have been plenty peaceful Demonstrations that where it was Effective. and on the flipside of that, main Revolutions Were won because of Blood Shed........... -
Gandhi had nearly 750,000,000 indians that were ready to merk.
So the hint of violence was always there. He knew how to play politics. -
ThaChozenWun wrote: »Whitey = rich, racist, old white men.
Whitey doesnt mean the entire race when I say it.
If you a ? makin millions a year and not helpin out the poor, they are whiteys also
So a black man that does something negative is called a whitey?
That is racist. -
listen carefully...universal, common, timeless knowledge
-
So a black man that does something negative is called a whitey?
That is racist.
I am racist toward rich folks who look down on everyone else, and those who hate others because of skin color -
DarcSkies777 wrote: »*SIIIIGH*
None of the responses tell me you people get what I mean. U all know I'm not talking about taking over right? Just making ? extremely uncomfortable for people to abuse and ? with you when all other methods fail (i.e. Court system, politics)
We both know most kneegrows are too traumatized by Uncle Sam & Willie Lynch to make ? even remotely uncomfortable for massah.
The kneegrow can be easily placated with shiny objects, air-jordans, white-women, and a tummy full of fried-food, he's not going to stick his neck out and risk becoming a martyr like Fred Hampton, or doing 25 years like Mutulu.
It would be within the best interest of all ruling majorities to espouse non-violent methods to its minorities....thats just common sense like locking your front door, but the hypocrisy cant be ignored when America was founded on bloodshed and has always celebrated her criminal/murderers like Jesse James, John Dillinger, and Al Capone.
Believe it or not we live under a system of white supremacy thats upheld and maintained by violent methods; from police shootings and beatings of unarmed Black men, to U.S. marines shooting Iraqi's..thats why its essential for those in power to deify passive-puppets like the post-incarceration Mandela, Dr. King, and poor Ghandi, and we cant forget white Jesus who let the proud Romans use him for an ornament.....any leader advocating armed resistance will be vilified, terminated, or incarcerated if not all three.
It is what it is Darc'. -
ether-i-am wrote: »It's funny how some say violence is the only way to deal with white people, AKA the oppressor, yet they can conquer us with trickery and deceit.
Can we not out think these people? Or any other race?
Out think? Since when do whites ever think? They've always used force.
Lets not perpetuate the myth of the savvy white man. Your species is basic at best. Great fighters though. But thats all you have over any race. Force.
Now you could argue that overpowering a peaceful people, stealing their resources and selling them later to get rich and buy the services of other country's scientists to build yourselves bombs is intelligent then you have a point. But at the end of the day force is just force. Doesnt take a genius to over power someone. -
ether-i-am wrote: »It's funny how some say violence is the only way to deal with white people, AKA the oppressor, yet they can conquer us with trickery and deceit.
Can we not out think these people? Or any other race?
Tru.......... -
But if whites are becoming the minority, as some studies suggest, programming the current minorites to be adversive towards violence is only a form of trickery and deciet to save the ? of whites.
-
DarcSkies777 wrote: »Out think? Since when do whites ever think? They've always used force.
Lets not perpetuate the myth of the savvy white man. Your species is basic at best. Great fighters though. But thats all you have over any race. Force.
Now you could argue that overpowering a peaceful people, stealing their resources and selling them later to get rich and buy the services of other country's scientists to build yourselves bombs is intelligent then you have a point. But at the end of the day force is just force. Doesnt take a genius to over power someone.
Nope...........but is Does take somebody intelligent to keep other in mental Slavery; To instill the Self-hating Ideas that we Have in the black Community, to have Us keep following a Cycle of Self Destruction and ? ..........We mired down by our on nonesense, yea the White Man had a Huge hand it in but We can get out out the pit, Some of us Just choose to stay in it for wateva morbid reason..............Thats intelligence, to have a group of people so warepd in Mental ? they dont know when they are hurting themselves -
i am going to deem this explanation... plausibleTo be honest, I used to scroll past your posts because you always would have some scary looking person in your avi.
is that your way of saying that i am correct, they're not all equally successful examples?its deeper than war
this is actually not being disputedI have heard enough vitriol, code-words, and propaganda from the Nascar crowd, and seen enough interviews and documentaries to come to the conclusion that many whites hate Obama because his father was a Black Afrikan, and a Black family is in the "white"-house
don't tell me "history teaches us," because that sounds like unsubstantiated nonsense. why don't you tell me what it's based on? to repeat myself, just for fun:History teaches us that gun sales reaching all time highs at two times in American history.....
1.) Post-slavery after African Americans were given their so-called freedom
2.) Post-election after Barack Obama was elected president
"all that drama about guys rushing out and buying guns and ammunition has much to do with the expectation that Obama/congressional Democrats would push for restrictions on firearms. this is not ONLY about race (this kind of thing happens whenever gun control legislation seems eminent) and the part i QUOTED misses that. h-rap isn't about to acknowledge that not everything's about race, especially not this."
claiming it's ONLY about race means you're less interested in the topic and more in obsessing
what about that Bill Gates and his computingDarcSkies777 wrote: »Lets not perpetuate the myth of the savvy white man. -
Did I read you right...you dispute historical facts now??i am going to deem this explanation... plausible
is that your way of saying that i am correct, they're not all equally successful examples?
this is actually not being disputed
don't tell me "history teaches us," because that sounds like unsubstantiated nonsense. why don't you tell me what it's based on? to repeat myself, just for fun:
"all that drama about guys rushing out and buying guns and ammunition has much to do with the expectation that Obama/congressional Democrats would push for restrictions on firearms. this is not ONLY about race (this kind of thing happens whenever gun control legislation seems eminent) and the part i QUOTED misses that. h-rap isn't about to acknowledge that not everything's about race, especially not this."
claiming it's ONLY about race means you're less interested in the topic and more in obsessing
what about that Bill Gates and his computing
Your passion over anything gun related would lead one to believe that you are either trying to overcompensate or you are deathly afraid of being victimized by rebellious neegrows who shun non-violent philosophy in favor of collecting troglodyte pelts and stringy-haired scalps.
For once I must agree with your assessment, the reason why white men went out and bought guns and ammo had more to do with policy than it did prejudice, they were not afraid of an islamic, terrorist, socialist, nigra who would open the mexican borders, and converse with jihad terrorists and Afrikan communists, and pledge allegiance to a crazed doomsday Black pastor advocating a race-war........they were simply buying guns and ammo in case new laws were passed that would try to strip the guns from their cold dead hands. -
lol. I was invited to a luncheon, which was about how we can save black males. And whats wrong with our black youth, and what can we do as solutions and so forth.
I had to stop and laugh because as I looked around, part of the crowd was texting and wouldnt even paying attention. Another part had no ? clue what they were talking about. The successful black folks, like the CEo's, vp's, and the ones with a little power were discussing goin to laker games and playin golf after it was over. And the rest just came to force their little agenda, and to leave. There was this one old couple, who came to the front had actually had some good things, to say and some resolutions, but were waved off because of time constraints. Aint that a ? . I told my friend, this is why its hard to get ? done in the community and make some changes. We will never be on the same page. And this was supposed to be all the so called leaders in the black community. All it turned into was a church service, and awhole lot of whining. -
i'm disputing your ability to prove these are historical facts. to repeat myself: "don't tell me "history teaches us," because that sounds like unsubstantiated nonsense. why don't you tell me what it's based on?" you're prepared to crow that these are "historical facts," so...Did I read you right...you dispute historical facts now??
you are really, really obsessed with genitalia. you may need to speak to someone about this. unrelated, some of us just happen to shoot and collect firearms, and oddly enough, you tend to buy things that might get banned before they get banned. who would have thought it?Your passion over anything gun related would lead one to believe that you are either trying to overcompensate-
i'm just going to point out the difference in our positions:For once I must agree with your assessment, the reason why white men went out and bought guns and ammo had more to do with policy than it did prejudice, they were not afraid of an islamic, terrorist, socialist, nigra who would open the mexican borders, and converse with jihad terrorists and Afrikan communists, and pledge allegiance to a crazed doomsday Black pastor advocating a race-war........they were simply buying guns and ammo in case new laws were passed that would try to strip the guns from their cold dead hands.
me: gun purchases based on a variety of factors
you: RACE RACE RACE
but seriously, keep telling yourself the latter is more reasoned and based solely on logic.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e5jvPZDzQrA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o7f5NTLgtEA
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=upHF-WpmacQ
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XVG3gaANAys
