Quest to learn about roots drives "slave tourism" in Ghana

African-American poet Maya Angelou once wrote: "Africa is a historical truth ... no man can know where he's going unless he knows exactly where he's been and exactly how he arrived at his present place."

This search for" historical truth" has led thousands of visitors to Cape Coast, in Ghana, a picturesque seaside town with stunning blue sea, serene beaches and pastel-colored fishing boats.

Instead of idyllic days under the sun, they are looking for a glimpse into their dark ancestral past -- the harrowing experience of their African forebears who were sold as slaves.

Roots tourism has brought more and more people of African descent, like Monique Ross and Jacques Wallace, to the sleepy fishing port.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/12/world/africa/on-the-road-ghana-roots-tourism/index.html?hpt=iaf_c2

There are a lot of black people in the U.S. curious to know what their ancestry is with a bit more detail than the 30 million square km known as "Africa" ...

I took a course on this at Berkeley.  Most are from West Africa...Ibo tribes.  

The Mandingo blood accounts for most of the superb physical features today...boxing, basketball, football, etc.  Yes...they were bred like dogs.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

African-American poet Maya Angelou once wrote: "Africa is a historical truth ... no man can know where he's going unless he knows exactly where he's been and exactly how he arrived at his present place."

This search for" historical truth" has led thousands of visitors to Cape Coast, in Ghana, a picturesque seaside town with stunning blue sea, serene beaches and pastel-colored fishing boats.

Instead of idyllic days under the sun, they are looking for a glimpse into their dark ancestral past -- the harrowing experience of their African forebears who were sold as slaves.

Roots tourism has brought more and more people of African descent, like Monique Ross and Jacques Wallace, to the sleepy fishing port.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/12/world/africa/on-the-road-ghana-roots-tourism/index.html?hpt=iaf_c2

There are a lot of black people in the U.S. curious to know what their ancestry is with a bit more detail than the 30 million square km known as "Africa" ...

Their ancestry??

Their ancestry is the same as yours unless they see themselves as Americans apart.

This whole "African American" fabrication simply shows how insecure black Americans are of their identity and how big a chip they have on their shoulder

Several generations of blacks down the line who associate themselves with a continent they have never been to

If they want to be Africans so much let them move there, they will soon be dying of dysentery and starvation.

Original Quill wrote:
I took a course on this at Berkeley.  Most are from West Africa...Ibo tribes.  

The Mandingo blood accounts for most of the superb physical features today...boxing, basketball, football, etc.  Yes...they were bred like dogs.

 

I have a copy of "Mandingo" sitting on a bookshelf here somewhere (from the early 1980s..).

That book is a lot more expllicit than the 'Mandingo' and 'Roots' movies and mini-series ever were..   

I think it's fine to be interested in your ancestry - nothing unusual in that. However, I also think that it's a mistake take umbrage on behalf of your ancestors. You can only live your life as yourself, and being resentful about what happened to others will just make you angry and unhappy.

Some black Americans don't like being called African American - usually because they've never been to Africa.

Raggamuffin wrote:I think it's fine to be interested in your ancestry - nothing unusual in that. However, I also think that it's a mistake take umbrage on behalf of your ancestors. You can only live your life as yourself, and being resentful about what happened to others will just make you angry and unhappy.

Some black Americans don't like being called African American - usually because they've never been to Africa.

What about when what happened to your ancestors has a demonstrable effect on your own socio-economic status?



http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/27/news/economy/wealth-whites-blacks/

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:I think it's fine to be interested in your ancestry - nothing unusual in that. However, I also think that it's a mistake take umbrage on behalf of your ancestors. You can only live your life as yourself, and being resentful about what happened to others will just make you angry and unhappy.

Some black Americans don't like being called African American - usually because they've never been to Africa.

What about when what happened to your ancestors has a demonstrable effect on your own socio-economic status?



http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/27/news/economy/wealth-whites-blacks/

I don't believe it has. It's their own attitude which is holding them back IMO.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

What about when what happened to your ancestors has a demonstrable effect on your own socio-economic status?



http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/27/news/economy/wealth-whites-blacks/

I don't believe it has. It's their own attitude which is holding them back IMO.

Very true - ask Bracca Barma!

He said exactly those words just the other week Ragga.

BigAndy9 wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

What about when what happened to your ancestors has a demonstrable effect on your own socio-economic status?



http://money.cnn.com/2013/02/27/news/economy/wealth-whites-blacks/

I don't believe it has. It's their own attitude which is holding them back IMO.

Very true - ask Bracca Barma!

He said exactly those words just the other week Ragga.

Let's see the quote!

Meanwhile:

http://iasp.brandeis.edu/pdfs/Author/shapiro-thomas-m/racialwealthgapbrief.pdf

Researchers who study the economics of households by ethnic groups said that although the gap in incomes between whites and blacks has narrowed over decades, the wealth gap has been more persistent.

“We know that the income gap is not as large; it has gotten smaller,” said Tatjana Meschede, research director at the Institute on Assets and Social Policy at Brandeis University. “But the wealth gap is stubbornly high.”

The recession also has slashed the wealth of Asian American households, which in 2005 had higher median wealth than white families but by 2009 had less. Their median wealth figure fell from $168,103 in 2005 to $78,066 in 2009, a drop of 54 percent.


http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/wealth-gap-widens-between-whites-minorities-report-says/2011/07/25/gIQAjeftZI_story.html

Yeah, I'm sorry, you guys are right. It makes no difference at all that white people brought wealth to the colonization of the Americas and passed it on through the generations, while black people were brought with nothing, in chains, and remained that way for several centuries. After all, the last black person to be owned as a slave in the U.S. died 43 years ago; that's like an eternity.

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, I'm sorry, you guys are right. It makes no difference at all that white people brought wealth to the colonization of the Americas and passed it on through the generations, while black people were brought with nothing, in chains, and remained that way for several centuries. After all, the last black person to be owned as a slave in the U.S. died 43 years ago; that's like an eternity.

Oh, are you talking about inherited money then?

Didn't most people who went to America start with nothing?

And how come just a few years ago the asians had more money than the whites?

Shall we start bleating about that too Ben?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:Yeah, I'm sorry, you guys are right. It makes no difference at all that white people brought wealth to the colonization of the Americas and passed it on through the generations, while black people were brought with nothing, in chains, and remained that way for several centuries. After all, the last black person to be owned as a slave in the U.S. died 43 years ago; that's like an eternity.

Oh, are you talking about inherited money then?

That's a big part of it, along with systemic discrimination:

"African-Americans, before the 1960s, first by law and then by custom, were not really allowed to own businesses. They had very little access to credit. There was a very low artificial ceiling on the wealth that could be accumulated. Hence there was very little, if anything, that could be passed along to help their children get to college, to help their children buy their first homes, or as an inheritance when they die," said Shapiro.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2010/may/17/white-people-95000-richer-black

In the U.S., white people are five times more likely to inherit a significant sum of money from their parents than black people are. Nothing level about that playing field. When you're born into a household that accumulates financial assets, you're likely to learn how to do that, to meet people who can do that, and to inherit some of those assets. When you're not born into that, you obviously start further back in the earnings race.

BigAndy9 wrote:Didn't most people who went to America start with nothing?

And how come just a few years ago the asians had more money than the whites?

Shall we start bleating about that too Ben?

Muslims took loads of Europeans as slave

dont hear us bleating about it

And when it's been several centuries since slavery died out in the U.S., you won't hear black people "bleating about it" either, most likely. Like I explained above, the legacy of slavery is still alive in the U.S. and affects many people.

Ben_Reilly wrote:And when it's been several centuries since slavery died out in the U.S., you won't hear black people "bleating about it" either, most likely. Like I explained above, the legacy of slavery is still alive in the U.S. and affects many people.

Don't bleat about it??

Jesus h Christ every time a black opens their mouths it's whining about how hard done by they are

The only ones keeping the legacy alive are the blacks themselves because they need an excuse to be victims

What's your excuse?

Sassy wrote:What's your excuse?

Muslims obviously

Im islamophope world champion haven't you heard

Yes I know, you've been that for a long time, although there are some equally as stupid so you share it, but what's your excuse for bleating all the time?

Sassy wrote:Yes I know, you've been that for a long time, although there are some equally as stupid so you share it, but what's your excuse for bleating all the time?

Well for starters I'm still waiting for this evidence you keep promising to post up

Lying whorebag

Oh Smelly, so many people remember it, and Ben has seen the mildest one.   You can protest all you like, you and I both know its true, you said it, I kept it because I didn't think there was a human being in the world who could say anything so disgusting.

smelly_bandit wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:Didn't most people who went to America start with nothing?

And how come just a few years ago the asians had more money than the whites?

Shall we start bleating about that too Ben?

Muslims took loads of Europeans as slave

dont hear us bleating about it

True but we did go crusader on the asses in response, plus the whole Napoleon kicking them about North Africa thing. we did get our own back. and in truth we just took over the industry that they had created out of exporting slaves from central/southern Africa.

smelly_bandit wrote:

Sassy wrote:What's your excuse?

Muslims obviously

Im islamophope world champion haven't you heard

would you be offended if I suggested that for your official title?
              

Sassy wrote:Oh Smelly, so many people remember it, and Ben has seen the mildest one.   You can protest all you like, you and I both know its true, you said it, I kept it because I didn't think there was a human being in the world who could say anything so disgusting.

If it's true then present your evidence

If this was the oscar pristorius trial he would be acquitted by now due to lack of evidence

veya_victaous wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

Muslims took loads of Europeans as slave

dont hear us bleating about it

True but we did go crusader on the asses in response, plus the whole Napoleon kicking them about North Africa thing. we did get our own back. and in truth we just took over the industry that they had created out of exporting slaves from central/southern Africa.

Was those the crusades that only started after 600 years of Islamic aggression

veya_victaous wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

Muslims took loads of Europeans as slave

dont hear us bleating about it

True but we did go crusader on the asses in response, plus the whole Napoleon kicking them about North Africa thing. we did get our own back. and in truth we just took over the industry that they had created out of exporting slaves from central/southern Africa.

We?

Aren't you Australian?

smelly_bandit wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

http://www.cnn.com/2014/03/12/world/africa/on-the-road-ghana-roots-tourism/index.html?hpt=iaf_c2

There are a lot of black people in the U.S. curious to know what their ancestry is with a bit more detail than the 30 million square km known as "Africa" ...

Their ancestry??

Their ancestry is the same as yours unless they see themselves as Americans apart.

This whole "African American" fabrication simply shows how insecure black Americans are of their identity and how big a chip they have on their shoulder

Hahahaha....owwww, bitter old man.  Take your meds, nasty, or the nurse will have to come in and give you a shot...right in the arse.

Ancestry the same??  Smelly, when you were a slave did you work tobacco or cotton?  Tell us about your common ancestry with the African.

Actually, according to sociologists and other survey researchers, the Africans among all American immigrants most wanted assimilation...recognition as Americans.  Take a real look at American history.  Most immigrants wanted to recreate their homeland, coming up with names like New Amsterdam, New York or New England.  The Dutch came along and kept to themselves.  The Germans, Swedes, Norse and Danes have come along and kept to themselves, forming enclaves.  The Italians have come along and kept to themselves, forming whole neighborhoods known as little Italy, as in the Village in NYC.  The Irish have come along and formed neighborhoods and, indeed, whole cities, as for example South Boston.

Africans??  All they ever wanted--all they want today--is to be seen and treated as whole Americans, something folks like you, smelly, will twist heaven and earth to deny them.  Why?...because you don't want it.  But today it has become too unpopular to express that notion, so you twist the whole thing around to say they don't want it.  You are frightened, aren't you smelly?  You smell of that fear.  It is the smell of cowardice and lack of self-esteem...run to the rock, rock won't you hide me, run to the tree, tree won't you hide me, Ah...sinnerman, where you gonna run to?

Of course, African Americans now know about people like you Smelly, and have come to realize that Conservatives and Republicans are inherently racist.  In the 1960,s African separatism came along in the form of the Black Muslims and Black Panthers.  Even in the thick of that, their cry for assimilation was paramount.  As one great American said:

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.

Their hope is not that separatism, but...

Rev. Dr. Martin Luthur King wrote:And when this happens, and when we allow freedom ring, when we let it ring from every village and every hamlet, from every state and every city, we will be able to speed up that day when all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual:

               Free at last! Free at last!

               Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!

Lose the mark there, smelly?

Original Quill wrote:

smelly_bandit wrote:

Their ancestry??

Their ancestry is the same as yours unless they see themselves as Americans apart.

This whole "African American" fabrication simply shows how insecure black Americans are of their identity and how big a chip they have on their shoulder

Ancestry the same??  Smelly, when you were a slave did you work tobacco or cotton?  Tell us about your common ancestry with the African.

You mean these black tourists are slaves?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:


Ancestry the same??  Smelly, when you were a slave did you work tobacco or cotton?  Tell us about your common ancestry with the African.

You mean these black tourists are slaves?

Wake up, rags. Smelly was talking about the "whole "African American" fabrication." He was telling us their "ancestry is the same as yours..."

I don't think so. And I think you need to read more closely. Slippin' 'n slidin' is what Conservatives and Republicans do when they get caught. I just don't let 'em off the hook.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

You mean these black tourists are slaves?

Wake up, rags.  Smelly was talking about the "whole "African American" fabrication."  He was telling us their "ancestry is the same as yours..."

I don't think so.  And I think you need to read more closely.  Slippin' 'n slidin' is what Conservatives and Republicans do when they get caught.  I just don't let 'em off the hook.

Yes, but you were talking about Smelly himself. These tourists aren't slaves who work on tobacco or cotton plantations either.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Wake up, rags.  Smelly was talking about the "whole "African American" fabrication."  He was telling us their "ancestry is the same as yours..."

I don't think so.  And I think you need to read more closely.  Slippin' 'n slidin' is what Conservatives and Republicans do when they get caught.  I just don't let 'em off the hook.

Yes, but you were talking about Smelly himself. These tourists aren't slaves who work on tobacco or cotton plantations either.

You're still missing the point, rags. Smelly was saying that African Americans want to distinguish themselves, when socially nothing could be further from the truth. Moreover, he was ridiculing them for it.

The fact that some of them are interested in their roots is all incidental noise, to smelly's thesis. He thinks that it is pretentious for them to have such concerns. I hazard to say that he wouldn't think it pretentious for Irish, Scots or Italian Americans to be interested in their roots...but that's how racism works, innit? Deny the Black man what you would willingly give a white man?

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Yes, but you were talking about Smelly himself. These tourists aren't slaves who work on tobacco or cotton plantations either.

You're still missing the point, rags.  Smelly was saying that African Americans want to distinguish themselves, when socially nothing could be further from the truth.  Moreover, he was ridiculing them for it.

The fact that some of them are interested in their roots is all incidental noise, to smelly's thesis.  He thinks that it is pretentious for them to have such concerns.  I hazard to say that he wouldn't think it pretentious for Irish, Scots or Italian Americans to be interested in their roots...but that's how racism works, innit?  Deny the Black man what you would willingly give a white man?

I've already said that I think it's fine to have an interest in one's ancestry, but if you use it to become a "victim" yourself, it's not good. Even the President said much the same thing in his "no excuses" speech.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

You're still missing the point, rags.  Smelly was saying that African Americans want to distinguish themselves, when socially nothing could be further from the truth.  Moreover, he was ridiculing them for it.

The fact that some of them are interested in their roots is all incidental noise, to smelly's thesis.  He thinks that it is pretentious for them to have such concerns.  I hazard to say that he wouldn't think it pretentious for Irish, Scots or Italian Americans to be interested in their roots...but that's how racism works, innit?  Deny the Black man what you would willingly give a white man?

I've already said that I think it's fine to have an interest in one's ancestry, but if you use it to become a "victim" yourself, it's not good. Even the President said much the same thing in his "no excuses" speech.

Your roots are in slavery, and it's "not good" to recall that???  That's like saying you're Irish, but you shouldn't be able to remember the great potato famine.  Or, some Chinese have roots in Nanking, but it's not good for them to remember how the Japanese raped and killed them???  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

What President Obama said is precisely what Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King said, in his August 1963 Washington speech (quoted above):

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King wrote:Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.

Obama is famous for the message, look not backwards, but forwards.  But recalling your roots is not looking backwards, but honouring your own heritage. Many, many times I have gone to Scotland, recalling my own heritage and visiting my family castle. I have visited the sites of the great clearances. I have visited the tomb of Mary Queen of Scots in Westminster, and the site of her death...Fotheringhay Castle. You're saying its not good to visit these places. What...it can only lead to my own victimization.

I think your interpretation is classic white elitism...your interpretation and imposition for and upon the Black man, of what he should or should not be interested in. That's no longer your business, nor your right.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I've already said that I think it's fine to have an interest in one's ancestry, but if you use it to become a "victim" yourself, it's not good. Even the President said much the same thing in his "no excuses" speech.

Your roots are in slavery, and it's "not good" to recall that???  That's like saying you're Irish, but you shouldn't be able to remember the great potato famine.  Or, some Chinese have roots in Nanking, but it's not good for them to remember how the Japanese raped and killed them???  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanking_Massacre

What President Obama said is precisely what Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King said, in his August 1963 Washington speech (quoted above):

Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King wrote:Go back to Mississippi, go back to Alabama, go back to South Carolina, go back to Georgia, go back to Louisiana, go back to the slums and ghettos of our northern cities, knowing that somehow this situation can and will be changed. Let us not wallow in the valley of despair.

Obama is famous for the message, look not backwards, but forwards.  But recalling your roots is not looking backwards, but honouring your own heritage.

It's not good to use the fact that your ancestors were slaves to become a "victim" yourself, no. It didn't happen to these tourists, it happened to others. One should honour their own achievements, not the misfortunes or bad treatment of their ancestors.

I've read stuff from black Americans on a certain forum, and some of them are very bitter and hate white people who have done nothing to them. They are just hurting themselves and becoming bigots themselves.

I think it's necessary that you get the full message:

Quill wrote:Obama is famous for the message, look not backwards, but forwards. But recalling your roots is not looking backwards, but honouring your own heritage. Many, many times I have gone to Scotland, recalling my own heritage and visiting my family castle. I have visited the sites of the great clearances. I have visited the tomb of Mary Queen of Scots in Westminster, and the site of her death...Fotheringhay Castle. You're saying its not good to visit these places. What...it can only lead to my own victimization.

I think your interpretation is classic white elitism...your interpretation and imposition for and upon the Black man, of what he should or should not be interested in. That's no longer your business, nor your right.

OK, but what about the fact that if you're an average black person in the U.S., wealth was not only systemically denied to your ancestors, but they were exploited to create wealth that was completely transferred away from them, and thus you are NOT beginning at the same point economically as the average white person?

Is that not a living legacy of slavery and segregation? Is it fair that the people who worked from sun-up to sundown got nothing for that and had nothing to pass to their descendants, while 99 percent of the wealth they created was taken from them, and much of that was passed to the descendants of those who worked them under threat of death?

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, but what about the fact that if you're an average black person in the U.S., wealth was not only systemically denied to your ancestors, but they were exploited to create wealth that was completely transferred away from them, and thus you are NOT beginning at the same point economically as the average white person?

Is that not a living legacy of slavery and segregation? Is it fair that the people who worked from sun-up to sundown got nothing for that and had nothing to pass to their descendants, while 99 percent of the wealth they created was taken from them, and much of that was passed to the descendants of those who worked them under threat of death?

Anyone can go to school - I presume it's free in the US. Anyone can learn skills, and anyone can develop an attitude which will make people want to employ them. The one thing which will hold them back is resentment because they will appear to be hostile. Plenty of white people don't start life with financial advantages either, but you are lumping them all together. People need to stop living in the past, and until they do so, they will never get anywhere.

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, but what about the fact that if you're an average black person in the U.S., wealth was not only systemically denied to your ancestors, but they were exploited to create wealth that was completely transferred away from them, and thus you are NOT beginning at the same point economically as the average white person?

Is that not a living legacy of slavery and segregation? Is it fair that the people who worked from sun-up to sundown got nothing for that and had nothing to pass to their descendants, while 99 percent of the wealth they created was taken from them, and much of that was passed to the descendants of those who worked them under threat of death?

Quite correct, Ben. All of that is what they want to obscure by their, look not to the past thesis. The 'victimization' nonsense is just noise to obscure that they don't want to be reminded themselves...of themselves.

'Victimization'...a word aimed at putting a pseudo-psychological patina on it all.

Original Quill wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, but what about the fact that if you're an average black person in the U.S., wealth was not only systemically denied to your ancestors, but they were exploited to create wealth that was completely transferred away from them, and thus you are NOT beginning at the same point economically as the average white person?

Is that not a living legacy of slavery and segregation? Is it fair that the people who worked from sun-up to sundown got nothing for that and had nothing to pass to their descendants, while 99 percent of the wealth they created was taken from them, and much of that was passed to the descendants of those who worked them under threat of death?

Quite correct, Ben.  All of that is what they want to obscure by their, look not to the past thesis.  The 'victimization' nonsense is just noise to obscure that they don't want to be reminded themselves.  'Victimization'...a word aimed at putting a pseudo-psychological patina on it all.

I told you - I've read posts from black people who do feel bitter, and they blame all white people for their misfortunes. That's what comes of resenting what happened to your ancestors.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:OK, but what about the fact that if you're an average black person in the U.S., wealth was not only systemically denied to your ancestors, but they were exploited to create wealth that was completely transferred away from them, and thus you are NOT beginning at the same point economically as the average white person?

Is that not a living legacy of slavery and segregation? Is it fair that the people who worked from sun-up to sundown got nothing for that and had nothing to pass to their descendants, while 99 percent of the wealth they created was taken from them, and much of that was passed to the descendants of those who worked them under threat of death?

Anyone can go to school - I presume it's free in the US. Anyone can learn skills, and anyone can develop an attitude which will make people want to employ them. The one thing which will hold them back is resentment because they will appear to be hostile. Plenty of white people don't start life with financial advantages either, but you are lumping them all together. People need to stop living in the past, and until they do so, they will never get anywhere.

Not everyone in the U.S. gets the same quality education. Throughout the U.S., areas with more rich people collect higher property taxes, which fund the neighborhood public schools to which the rich people's kids go.

It works the same way in poor communities, where the meager property taxes collected there are all the funding those local schools have, so the poor kids go to crap schools with fewer quality teachers, older textbooks and crumbling infrastructure compared to the rich kids.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Anyone can go to school - I presume it's free in the US. Anyone can learn skills, and anyone can develop an attitude which will make people want to employ them. The one thing which will hold them back is resentment because they will appear to be hostile. Plenty of white people don't start life with financial advantages either, but you are lumping them all together. People need to stop living in the past, and until they do so, they will never get anywhere.

Not everyone in the U.S. gets the same quality education. Throughout the U.S., areas with more rich people collect higher property taxes, which fund the neighborhood public schools to which the rich people's kids go.

It works the same way in poor communities, where the meager property taxes collected there are all the funding those local schools have, so the poor kids go to crap schools with fewer quality teachers, older textbooks and crumbling infrastructure compared to the rich kids.

It's the same in the UK. However, a child is perfectly capable of deciding whether to pay attention or not, or to their homework or not. It's not as if any of them are told they are not allowed to go to school because they're a certain colour is it?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Original Quill wrote:

Quite correct, Ben.  All of that is what they want to obscure by their, look not to the past thesis.  The 'victimization' nonsense is just noise to obscure that they don't want to be reminded themselves.  'Victimization'...a word aimed at putting a pseudo-psychological patina on it all.

I told you - I've read posts from black people who do feel bitter, and they blame all white people for their misfortunes. That's what comes of resenting what happened to your ancestors.

How arrogant are you to presume to tell black people--or anyone, for that matter--what to think or how to feel. Conservatives and Republicans are elitists of the first degree. We hear Paul Ryan telling blacks, welfare is instructive of dependency, and you need to get away from that. How arrogant!!

His free ride in the US Congress is a kind of dependency, and he needs to be relieved of that.

Original Quill wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I told you - I've read posts from black people who do feel bitter, and they blame all white people for their misfortunes. That's what comes of resenting what happened to your ancestors.

How arrogant are you to presume to tell black people--or anyone, for that matter--what to think or how to feel.  Conservatives and Republicans are elitists of the first degree.  We hear Paul Ryan telling blacks, welfare is instructive of dependency, and you need to get away from that.  How arrogant!!  

His free ride in the US Congress is a kind of dependency, and he needs to be relieved of that.

I have the right to tell them they're being bigoted and racist against white people, and I have the right to defend myself against some twat who tells me that I'm scum just because I'm white.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Anyone can go to school - I presume it's free in the US. Anyone can learn skills, and anyone can develop an attitude which will make people want to employ them. The one thing which will hold them back is resentment because they will appear to be hostile. Plenty of white people don't start life with financial advantages either, but you are lumping them all together. People need to stop living in the past, and until they do so, they will never get anywhere.

Not everyone in the U.S. gets the same quality education. Throughout the U.S., areas with more rich people collect higher property taxes, which fund the neighborhood public schools to which the rich people's kids go.

It works the same way in poor communities, where the meager property taxes collected there are all the funding those local schools have, so the poor kids go to crap schools with fewer quality teachers, older textbooks and crumbling infrastructure compared to the rich kids.

It's the same in the UK. However, a child is perfectly capable of deciding whether to pay attention or not, or to their homework or not. It's not as if any of them are told they are not allowed to go to school because they're a certain colour is it?

You are really oversimplifying the issue. Rich school districts get kids brought up in an environment of learning (because their parents were, and so on). They get kids who have been told by their parents the importance of getting a good education (because they were told by their parents).

They get the best-qualified teachers who are better at engaging students in their learning. They get kids who come to school not worrying about the car having broken down, not worrying about the fact they didn't get to eat breakfast, not worrying about a host of social problems that plague children who live in poverty.

You simply can't say that poor kids (who in the U.S. are more likely to be minorities, as you well know) have the same opportunity as the rich kids. There's a reason we call kids who live in poverty disadvantaged -- because they lack advantages that other children have, and advantages are determiners of success.

"Bigoted and racist against white people? What a fookin' joke!!

Against the slave-holders...the po', po' slave owners?! Your argument is to forget, right? For what reason? Now come clean...why is forgetting your own evil deeds so important? And why do you try so hard to get blacks to forget?

Of course, I'm speaking to the typical white, who tries to justify and reinvent history. You're not the only one...it's a human trait.

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's the same in the UK. However, a child is perfectly capable of deciding whether to pay attention or not, or to their homework or not. It's not as if any of them are told they are not allowed to go to school because they're a certain colour is it?

You are really oversimplifying the issue. Rich school districts get kids brought up in an environment of learning (because their parents were, and so on). They get kids who have been told by their parents the importance of getting a good education (because they were told by their parents).

They get the best-qualified teachers who are better at engaging students in their learning. They get kids who come to school not worrying about the car having broken down, not worrying about the fact they didn't get to eat breakfast, not worrying about a host of social problems that plague children who live in poverty.

You simply can't say that poor kids (who in the U.S. are more likely to be minorities, as you well know) have the same opportunity as the rich kids. There's a reason we call kids who live in poverty disadvantaged -- because they lack advantages that other children have, and advantages are determiners of success.

Why can't poor people tell their children it's important to get an education? You don't need to be rich to say that. In fact, it's even more important if there's less money. Those children have the opportunity to decide they're going to do well at school, with or without a good teacher. I went to a primary school which was considered a bit "lax" really, but that didn't stop me. I don't buy this theory that children are incapable of being ambitious or thinking for themselves.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

It's the same in the UK. However, a child is perfectly capable of deciding whether to pay attention or not, or to their homework or not. It's not as if any of them are told they are not allowed to go to school because they're a certain colour is it?

You are really oversimplifying the issue. Rich school districts get kids brought up in an environment of learning (because their parents were, and so on). They get kids who have been told by their parents the importance of getting a good education (because they were told by their parents).

They get the best-qualified teachers who are better at engaging students in their learning. They get kids who come to school not worrying about the car having broken down, not worrying about the fact they didn't get to eat breakfast, not worrying about a host of social problems that plague children who live in poverty.

You simply can't say that poor kids (who in the U.S. are more likely to be minorities, as you well know) have the same opportunity as the rich kids. There's a reason we call kids who live in poverty disadvantaged -- because they lack advantages that other children have, and advantages are determiners of success.

Why can't poor people tell their children it's important to get an education? You don't need to be rich to say that. In fact, it's even more important if there's less money. Those children have the opportunity to decide they're going to do well at school, with or without a good teacher. I went to a primary school which was considered a bit "lax" really, but that didn't stop me. I don't buy this theory that children are incapable of being ambitious or thinking for themselves.

Why would they advocate that their children actively engage in a system that failed them in every way?

Original Quill wrote:"Bigoted and racist against white people?  What a fookin' joke!!

Against the slave-holders...the po', po' slave owners?!  Your argument is to forget, right?  For what reason?  Now come clean...why is forgetting your own evil deeds so important?  And why do you try so hard to get blacks to forget?

Of course, I'm speaking to the typical white, who tries to justify and reinvent history.  You're not the only one...it's a human trait.

Yes, bigoted and racist against white people. Are you one of these people who think that black people can't be bigoted or racist? You are sadly mistaken. They are that way because they resent what happened to their ancestors, and they blame all white people for it. That's bigotry.

What evil deeds do you mean? Are you accusing me of keeping a black person in slavery?

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Why can't poor people tell their children it's important to get an education? You don't need to be rich to say that. In fact, it's even more important if there's less money. Those children have the opportunity to decide they're going to do well at school, with or without a good teacher. I went to a primary school which was considered a bit "lax" really, but that didn't stop me. I don't buy this theory that children are incapable of being ambitious or thinking for themselves.

Why would they advocate that their children actively engage in a system that failed them in every way?

You think they should tell their children not to bother at school?

No wonder they don't get anywhere. I daresay they tell them to not bother getting a job either then.