Howard the Duck

yet, strangely Lynyrd Skynyrd are not racist

the Confederate flag is some sort of symbol to most Southern rock bands and outlaw country acts, that's it usually an emblem of the South, rather than a "hang a Negro on a tree" gesture

__________________


Malaise is THE dominant human predilection.

Unknown Soldier

I doubt Lynyrd Skynyrd and other southern rock bands are racist at all, but unfortunately they are a musical focal point and symbol for racists.

TheBig3

Not appreciated, jackass.

blastingas10

So, if there is a problem with flying a confederate flag, is there a problem with flying a flag with a black fist representing black power on it?

Guybrush

Is the black power movement for racial oppression of non-blacks?

__________________
Something Completely Different

hip hop bunny hop

The traditional leftist answer is along the lines of:

LINK

...you can actually see this argument being used to such as extremes that the Rwandan genocide is blamed on imperialism by Europeans, even though Rwanda had been independent for 32 years at that point.

Let's take them at face value and pretend the "moderates" (e.g, Bobby Seale in his Panther days) have a monopoly on the term and are the majority of people who use it, Tore; if a white guy were to claim he wants racial homogeneity in his community, wanted his race to be in control of his community's government, economy, and media.... would he be considered racist? That's what these "Black Power" folks advocate.

__________________
Have mercy on the poor.

Sparky

Come on man, the Black Panthers were formed during a time when African-Americans had practically no free media,inadequate education, nor power in government.

Sure it sounds racist from an objective standpoint 50 years later, but if you have any sort of cultural awareness you'd know the two are not comparable.

It is if it's a hate crime
It is if it's a hate crime. There were never any group of African-Americans dedicated to the lynching and murder of innocent Caucasians. History does play a part in racism, believe it or not.

Unknown Soldier

When a group is racially oppressed by a more numerous group, it normally forms nationalism in the group that were the victims of this opression. Great examples over the last couple of centuries have included whites and blacks in the USA, Jews in Europe and most recently Serbs and Muslims in old Yugoslavia.

Point here being in this thread, is the KKK are downright racist, wereas the BPM are based on black pride which manifests itself in the form of nationalism. Without groups like the KKK, there would be no need for a group like the BPM to actually exist.

The actual need for any racist and nationalist groups to actually exist in the current world is a sorry state indeed, we live in a multi-cultural society where people have just become too intermingled to ever reverse the cycle, its a shame that there are some sorry bastards that continue to pursue racial disharmony, it would be so much easier if they just lived peacefully with their neighbours.

The Batlord

Indeed. I think of it like a pendulum. It swung too far in the direction of a lack of rights for black people, now it's swinging back, and of course the pendulum goes too far in the other direction (equal and opposite reaction and all that). Not that it's going too far in the sense of black people having too many rights or anything, just when black people started getting and fighting for their rights after so much oppression, it was natural for there to be some extremism.

__________________

hip hop bunny hop

You are all simplifying the interplay of race and slavery in the context of the USA; some examples being -

-the first person legally recognized as property, in the colonial USA, was black
---as was his owner
-Indians also owned slaves; some after the civil war

So, let's be clear; black's owned black slaves; indian's owned black slaves; and whites owned black slaves. The issue of chattel slavery vs. traditional is of course important (and obvious); but, let's keep in mind we're speaking of this slavery occurring in the same time period, and all these groups had members who participated in brutal chattel slavery.

In this, we see such a system of slavery was not unique to the USA, but also existed in Latin America, notably in Brazil. I'm sure you're all familiar with las Casas and the role he played in substituting slavery of Indians with that of Africans.

If you're going to advocate the notion that multiculturalism & racial egalitarianism is a genuinely moral in the full meaning of the word, fine, but that notion is directly at odds with the concept that racism is acceptable at times. What you're trying to say is something to the effect of, "The ends don't justify the means, except when they do."

That is, unless I misread you and you're claiming that racism is positive some times.


You're presuming multiculturalism can work, you're ignoring that multiculturalism is a phenomenon exclusive to the west, and your fatalism is anything but convincing.

__________________
Have mercy on the poor.