From: e199-ac@hydrus (Alexander Lee)
Subject: Re: Keeping in mind that this is AmeriKKKa
Organization: University of California, at Berkeley
Date: Sun, 26 Jul 1992 21:36:44 GMT

In article <MDAY.92Jul25100230@jukebox.lcs.mit.edu> mday@jukebox.lcs.mit.edu (Mark Day) writes:

Before I begin, I would appreciate it, Mark, if you would not take things
out of context, delete large chunks of relevant posts, and twist facts
to help support your argument.  I understand that that's what people with
an obvious lack of intelligence must resort to.

>

 <Mark deletes a large chunk of Judy's post to hide his ignorance>

    Mark writes to Judy:
>   >Oh, wake up and smell the coffee, already.  You act like all whites
>   >are upper-middle class, too.  I'll show you some of the fun
>   >neighborhoods round here with white gangs and sweatshops.
>   >
>   >Dividing the have-nots against each other based on race is part of how
>   >the haves stay in control.  And people like you play right into their
>   >hands.  

	Of course, you delete all of your incriminating statements here.
>
>   I don't think that Judy had any intention to deny the existence of
>   poor white folks, nor do I think that she's trying to divide the
>   have-nots in this country, Especially when she was the one to approve
>   of Af/As relationships more than As/White relationships.
>
>Huh?  This pair of sentences makes no sense. 

	Maybe you should learn how to read.  Read it
	slowly this time.  Sound out the words if you have to,
	and see how it fits in with your accusation of Judy's
	post that you [conveniently] deleted.


> My whole point is that
>Judy's gone and confused a symptom (white racism) with its underlying
>cause (a minority of great wealth that maintains its position by
>keeping racism stoked up so that poor white people feel superior to
>people of color instead of feeling inferior to the rich white people).
>Disapproving of Asian/white relationships is the quintessence of
>what's wrong with Judy's approach, since it serves only to further
>racial animosity.

	You still don't get it do you??  First you attempt to second guess 
	what Judy posted.  Then you accuse me of second guessing you when
	All I said was that Judy did not deny the existence of poor white 
	folks that you accused her of.  Furthermore, why should we even
	bother allying with poor white folks who feel superior to us, just
	because they're white?  What gives you the impression that 
	have-nots are out to get you in the first place?  Get you're 
	paranoid little brain calmed down before you read anymore posts.
>
>   I think (correct me if I'm wrong) that all she was merely trying to do
>   was note the disparity of wealth in this country as it applies to race
>   and to dispel of the stereo-type that all Asian Americans in this
>   country are upper-middle class (Sounds kinda familiar, Huh?).
>
>As far as I can tell from what Judy's posted, she doesn't distinguish
>between "white" and "rich and powerful".  I've seen nothing that
>indicates that she understands that there's a profound disparity of
>wealth among whites, too.  I see nothing that indicates that you
>really understand this yet, either.
>
>--Mark Day
>
	There you go again, speculating on Judy's idealogy.  Let
	me make one thing clear to you, Mark, I never said that 
	"all white people are rich".  You don't need to explain 
	that to me.  Look above you.  All I said was that Judy
	was trying to dispel of the stereo-type that all Asian 
	Americans are upper-middle class.  Take what people have to
	say on face value.  Don't try to read between the lines,
	and don't try to speculate on what they really mean, cause
	you're interpretation is obviously misguided.

After virually reinstating my previous post to an obvious imbecile,
I really want to move on to another topic.

Alex