HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: cwm54@cas.org ()
Subject: Re: Death Penalty, for or against?
Organization: Chemical Abstracts Service, Columbus, Ohio
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 17:35:00 GMT

In article <HANS.92Oct5155640@ravn.iesd.auc.dk> hans@iesd.auc.dk (Hans Huttel) writes:
>
>In article <BvGM7p.G0p@NCoast.ORG> cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher
>Morton) writes:
>
>> 2. The question of deterrence is irrelevant.  The death penalty prevents
>> recidivism by the perpetrator, ABSOLUTELY.
>>
>> 3. Chronically violent persons present a threat not only to society at large,
>> but to prison guards and inmates alike.  What should be done, indeed what CAN
>> be done with someone who continues to commit murder after receiving a life
>> sentence?  Curtail his icecream ration?
>
>[ stuff deleted ]
>
>> Make it DANGEROUS to commit crimes.  The only thing that the current
>> mania for repressive gun controls has proven is that gun control makes
>> crime safe for the criminal.
>
>But then, surely, even shoplifters should be executed to prevent them
>from stealing again ?
>
>On a more serious note: What is the purpose of the U.S. criminal
>system ?  Is it the prevention of recidivism ? The revenge of whoever
>makes the laws against those perceived as criminals ? As far as I, a
>naive European who has only visited the United States once, the latter
>seems to be the case. Not that we are better off on this side of the
>Atlantic (see below).
>
>I would urge anyone in favour of the death penalty to think of the
>British cases of the Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six. As we all
>know now, these 10 people were innocent and had been framed by police
>officers seeking promotion. After the appalling IRA pub bombings in
>1974 there was widespread support for the idea of reintroducing the
>death penalty in the UK. If the death penalty had been reintroduced,
>ten innocent people would have lost their lives. It was only because
>of British TV that the truth was eventually accepted.
>
>Is that really the sort of risk we are willing to take ?
>
>The Guildford Four and the Birmingham Six were framed because they
>happened to be Irish in the wrong place at the wrong time. What on
>earth would prevent the U.S. police from using similar tactics against
>Black people ? How do we know that it hasn't happened ?
>
>
>- Hans
>--
>Hans H{\"u}ttel                          - hans@iesd.auc.dk
>Mathematics and Computer Science
>Aalborg University, Fredrik Bajersvej 7E,
>9220 Aalborg, DENMARK                     Ad slagne veje ?




       Out of the mouths of Europeans.

	    Nice article, keep writing.
From: carl.camurca@travel.com (Carl Camurca)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Black Racism - Jokes
Date: 29 Sep 92 13:28:00 GMT
Article-I.D.: travel.3780.117.uupcb
Reply-To: carl.camurca@travel.com (Carl Camurca)
Distribution: world
Organization: Travel Online / St. Louis Online - St. Louis, MO

Hi!

This is the second request...
I'm looking for racistic jokes to the extent of Whites.
Please post examples.

greetinx, Carl.

 * OLX 2.1 TD * Happy happy, joy joy!
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Quayle's not-so-subtle message
Keywords: subliminal hortonized messages
From: galan@netlink.cts.com (Greg Gross)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 92 00:28:30 PDT
Organization: NetLink Online Communications, San Diego CA

steubrow@wam.umd.edu (Sharon Teuben-Rowe) writes:

> I too not only watched the repeated newscasts of Quayle's feeble response
> to the Murphy Brown broadcast, but I noticed the group of black "single
> mothers' who supposeldly watched the program with him.  I recognize that
> D.C. has a sizable black community, but I couldn't get beyond this image
> of blank-eyed Quayle sharing an hour of his time with people he has so
> terribly little in common with.
> 
> Gosh, golly, is it possible that this veteran of the Indiana National Guard
> was using (in the exploitative sense) these women?  It sounds too sophis-
> ticated for the likes of Danforth... but still... I just thought I'd mention
> it.
> 
> Sharon
> 
> 
> 


what I most enjoyed was what people reportedly chanting to J. Danforth as 
he was outside talking about the show:

"FOUR MORE MONTHS! FOUR MORE MONTHS!"
G.

--
Gregory Alan Gross      Welcome to life, where no good deed goes unpunished.
San Diego Union-Tribune         (619) 293-1270 (voice)
P.O. Box 191                    (619) 293-2333 (fax)
San Diego, CA 92112-4106        galan@netlink.cts.com (Internet)
From: tuff@ellis.uchicago.edu (Geoff Tuffli)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Apportioning blame
Date: 29 Sep 92 17:19:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: midway.1992Sep29.171932.17611
Reply-To: tuff@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

In article <32310012@hpmwmat.sr.hp.com> mikep@hpmwtd.sr.hp.com (Mike Powell) writes:
>	An empowering question would be: "What opportunity is sitting
>	right in front of me, that I have not seen before?"
>
>	Now _that_ question can get results....  it actually presupposes
>	the opposite of the first, namely, it presupposes that opportunity
>	ALREADY EXISTS, and prompts the individual to find it, whereas
>	the first question is enough to make one fall into depression.
>
>	Time to ask better questions.  Whites don't force Black America
>	to ask bad questions... asking bad questions is second nature
>	to most everyone, and the only thing stopping anyone from asking
>	good questions is simply _choice_.  Black America must choose how
>	it wants to view the world.... how it wants to frame questions (that
>	ultimatly determine the quality of the answers).
>
>	Peace.
>
>	-Mike-
>
	Unfortunately, the situation is more complex than this. The fact is
that those who begin in an economically-disadvantaged situation, i.e., an
extremely large percentage of blacks, DO have a lessoned opportunity.

	The common cry is often heard, "If I could make it out of the ghetto,
anyone can."

	This cry is, to put it mildly, fallacious. Take the starting economic
and educational position of all the children in the U.S for the past twenty
years, to pick an arbitrary number, and then look at their economic and
educational position today. The reality of the situation is that the vast
majority of people who started in a low-income bracket will end up in one. The
majority of people who started in a middle-class situation will end up in a
middle-class position; and the majority of the people who start in an upper-
class situation will end up in one. This is a reality.
 
	Yes, opportunity must be recognized, and individuals certainly should
grab the ones that pass by them, but this does not change the basic reality
that one who is born in an economically disadvantaged state _will_ have a
_much_ harder time attaining a similar level gained by someone who began with
less of a disadvantage.

	Geoff Tuffli
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: jumper@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Michael Lanham)
Subject: Defeating the myth of "races"
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution: soc
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 01:10:48 GMT

G Daniels said something that intriuged(sp) the other day.  The comment was
that he had read a book that showed "races" were fictional inventions--or
similiar words to that effect.  I am sure Mr Daniels will correct me when I
stray...:-)

Anyway, I had a class called Darwinsim in Science and Society.  The class
pretty much focues on the ways Darwinism, in its original and newer
interpretations--has been missused and abused.  Most specifically by the
eugenics movements in the late 1800's and even more prominently in the
1910s-1920s.  

Since my (limited) experience would seem to support the idea that races are an
invention of academics...Why not pursue the eradication of the term "race" in
modern society?  

Would eradicating the concept--NOT just the word--go a long way towards
dumping false separations and measuring sticks?  Just at first blush, I think
it would.

BTW, if you think the above might apply...would it actually hurt more than
the majority race?  (sidestepping the issue of who decides whom is the
majority race)  I ask that in the context of, if the idea of separate races is
abolished, especially as established in government and law, how do blacks and
other minorities redress their greivances?


He who will not reason, is a bigot; he who cannot is a fool;
and he who dares not is a slave.      --- Sir William Drummond

Michael Lanham       mjlanham@eos.ncsu.edu   &  jumper@catt.ncsu.edu
From: helfman@aero.org (Robert S. Helfman)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Death Penalty, for or against?
Date: 6 Oct 1992 08:05:50 GMT
Organization: The Aerospace Corporation, El Segundo, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: aerospace.aero.org

In article <Bvo0wq.Hz1@NCoast.ORG> cmort@ncoast.org (Christopher Morton) writes:
>As quoted from <HANS.92Oct5155640@ravn.iesd.auc.dk> by hans@iesd.auc.dk (Hans Huttel):
>
>> 
>> In article <BvGM7p.G0p@NCoast.ORG> cmort@NCoast.ORG (Christopher
>> Morton) writes:
>> 
>
>Yes.  Of course why are YOU willing to take the risk of imprisoning an 
>innocent man?  After all, he could be raped or even murdered in prison.  In
>fact, the American Civil Liberties Union takes that position and opposes even
>encarceration for most crimes.

This is unadulterated bullshit. The ACLU has never taken such a position and
if you knew anything about the organization, you would be aware of this.
But, of course, you take the typical right-wing view that the ACLU is in the
business of 'coddling' criminals. The ACLU has only one agenda - the
protection of everyone's civil liberties, including yours - even if you're
a bloody fascist. They don't defend the person - they defend his (and your)
rights. It makes no difference what your political persuasion or how
despicable a creep you might be. It's interesting how you right wingers
conveniently forget that the ACLU defended Ollie North (because his
immunity for his congressional testimony was then ignored in order to
prosecute him), and they defended the Nazis when they wanted to march in
Skokie, Illinois (and the ACLU lost lots of 'fair-weather' members over
that, like 30% of their membership).

Remember, buddy, Miranda-Escobedo-Gideon applies to everyone, even
you. The constitution doesn't say anything about these things only
applying to the folks you consider as 'good' people. I don't like
ax murderers, Richard Rodriguez, or Jeffery Dahmer any more than you
do, but they've got the same rights you do and the ACLU will fight
for them and you and me whenever civil liberties are being trampled.

Sorry,  sometimes I really can't get off my soapbox. But someone had
to say this.
From: ronaldd@cbnewse.cb.att.com (ronald.h.davis)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: National flag for blacks
Date: 6 Oct 92 18:38:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: cbnewse.1992Oct6.183841.2632
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Oct6.175949.27399@cas.org> cwm54@cas.org () writes:
>
>    It is not easy for me because I don't buy your definition of patriotism.
>
>    True, we have contributed greatly to this country but I fail to
>
>    see a direct corrolation between contribution and "love and loyalty
>
>    or ZEALOUS support for (ones) country".(Webster)  History is replete
>
well, webster's dictionary also has definitions for the words "love" and
"loyalty" but, as a practical matter, what do they have to do with your
day to day experience with either concept.  "love", "loyalty", and
"patriotism" are loaded words which ultimately mean whatever the speaker
wants them to mean [although this is not necessarily the same to the
listener].

this fact is also why i raised the issue of flag waving, which, according
to your interpretation of the above definition would constitute "patriotism"
[although i contend that i could construct an interpretation (as i did)
in which i declare them *not* patriotic because they don't support the
ideal of what this nation really stands for.  in the end it's like "family
values" it means to you what you want it to mean to you; q.e.d.

>    with examples of peoples who made great contributions to a country
>
>    but who did not feel patriotism for it. It is not logical to feel
>
>    love or loyalty for your oppressors. But there are many african
>
this is true if you believe that the oppressor (which i take as a reference
to white people) *is* the country since patriotism, according to your
definitiion revolves around love of a "country", not a people.  hmmm...i
suspect a lot of folks might call you on that one.

-- 
  __  ______  __  / __/ |       at&t bell laboratories, naperville il, usa
_/ (_(_) / (_(_/_/_(_/  .       ronald@iexist.att.com / att!iexist!ronald
"if you ain't the lead dog, the scenery never changes" -- edmund wilson
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: mfriedma@uucp (Michael Friedman)
Subject: Re: Pessimism
Organization: Oracle Corporation
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:37:11 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

In article <1992Sep28.002425.25683@morrow.stanford.edu> HF.GTD@forsythe.stanford.edu (Gabrielle Daniels) writes:
>In article <jumper.717540026@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu>,
>jumper@garfield.catt.ncsu.edu (Michael Lanham) writes to
>>cwm54@cas.org ()
>>The time is 1830-1850:  Replace the word black above with either of two
>>groups: Irish or Chinese.  What was said above about modern blacks was said
>>then about shiftless Irish, men who left their wives(& they were Catholic),
>>families falling apart etc.

>This is a silly ass reply, and it shows what kind of tunnel vision
>exists in certain white Americans.

Actually, I think the tunnle vision is on the other side.  See below...

>The Irish may be the n-----rs of the British Isles and the Chinese
>may have come here because of the Opium Wars, overpopulation, famine
>and what not.  But on the totem pole, [...] Asians
>are admitted more into white suburbs than economically or
>intellectually fit Afro-Americans--in other words, they have what I
>call "honorary white status." 

So how did they get this "honorary white status"?  Perhaps whites just
naturally find yellow more aesthetically pleasing than black?  Or
maybe it's something a little more complicated.



-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am not an official Oracle spokesman.  I speak for myself and no one else.
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: bc205cs@opie.bgsu.edu
Subject: Re: him/her he/she .....
Organization: Bowling Green State University
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 19:40:52 GMT

In response to Lynn Evette Clarke's femenist tirade:
     In her post, Lynn basically cuts down another poster for the use of only
male terms.  Lynn, does not, however, offer a remedy for this situation.
     An example:  'A person who owns a car should check his/her oil often.'
Now, in that sentence, I was very careful to be politically correct -- but who
gives a fuck?  I'm sick of writing him/her, his/her, he/she, and on and on...
     Lynn writes:

     >u render females invisible

     Yes, to people who are 2 damn stupid to realize that him, his, he, can be 
used to refer to females as well, it may seem that females are not being
mentioned.  The fact is, when the Bible says that all men have sinned, that
means all people.  You see, words can have different meanings, depending on
their context.  Maybe this is 2 big of a concept 4 you, but in certain
contexts, him is not a _male_ objective pronoun, but a _human_ objective
pronoun.  When somebody uses such pronouns, I'm afraid that most people have no
trouble understanding, so why change it?
     Lynn also writes:

     >sure it is difficult 2 change language and society...

     Well, I would have guessed that it would be hard to make a difference --
especially if you continually bitch about issues that have no consequence. 
Maybe in some schizophrenic's nightmare, the use of he and him is subconciously
causing people to supress women.  I admit that women *still* don't have equal
rights in this society, but c'mon, who gives a shit about a word?  I think that
femenist movement would do much better to concentrate on more important issues
such as equal pay for women, getting more women into congress, etc.  Even if
the use of male terms as general words *does* have a detrimental effect (Which
I remain skeptical about), I think it's stupid 2 bitch about that while there
is so much else that could be being done.

-- The Bible reference in this posting is used to make a point, and does not
   represent the religious affiliations of the poster.

Have a fine and happy day, Really,

Joshua
From: lkk@panix.com (Larry Kolodney)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: Re: Good books on African-American history?
Date: 27 Sep 92 02:16:08 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix, NYC

In <3089@voodoo.UUCP> das@voodoo.boeing.com (Deb Schwartz) writes:

>As the title says, I would like recommendations for good books on
>Africa-American history.

>Thank you,

>Debbie Schwartz // das@voodoo.boeing.com  // or uunet!bcstec!voodoo!das 



"A Short History of Reconstruction" by Eric Foner.  Harper & Row:
1990. 297 pp.  A fascinating account of this vital yet mostly
forgotten period in American History, when the hopes of emancipated
Southern blacks were raised and then brutally crushed.  All over our
racial problems can be traced back to the mistakes of this period.

"White Supremacy" by George M. Fredrickson.  Oxford University Press:
1981.  356 pp.  A comparative study of white supremacist ideology and
practice in the U.S. and South Africa.  Brings to light many suprising
similarities as well as important differences.  Slavery was relatively
rare in South Africa, and the original victims of white racism in the
Americas were Native American, who now live in homelands like in S.A.


 
-- 
larry kolodney:(lkk@panix.com) 
_(*#&)#*&%)@(*^%_!*&%^!)*&#+!*&$+!?&%+!*&^_)*&#%)*&^%#+&
The past is not dead, it's not even past.   - Wm. Faulkner
From: 6500ursa@ucsbuxa.ucsb.edu (Disco Junkie)
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
Subject: African names-why aren't there more of them?
Date: 2 Oct 92 19:21:34 GMT
Distribution: soc

I have a question that I would like to ask the people on this newsgroup
about.  This concerns the issue of names.  I am an asian-american, and
my family name reflects the heritage of my ancestors.  This is something that
I can be proud of, and one that I would be proud to pass onto my children.
Yet, isn't it true that for most african-americans, the family name is that of 
the slaveowners from time past?  If so, why aren't there more african-americans
that change their name to an African one?  I would not want to give my children
the name of a slaveowner.

If I was an african-american, I would definitely change my "family" name,
because it would not represent my family.  From what I've studied, enslaved
Africans were often given the name of their slaveowner.  This name was used in
an effort to strip the African of his ties to his culture.  To me, this name 
would thus represent the name of the person who stripped me of my culture 
and freedom, whipped me at will, raped my great grandmothers, and split apart 
my ancestor's families.  Surely, if I was an african-american, I would not 
wish to honor such scum by holding onto their name.  Instead, I would adopt an 
African name, or at least change it to a name other than that of the 
slavemaster.  Wasn't this the idea behind why a Malcolm Little changed his 
name to Malcolm X?  As far as I can tell, most african-americans I've met have 
english-sounding names.  I personally like the way some african-americans 
have african first names, but still, why hold onto a slaveowner's family
name?

You might think that I"m putting too much importance on trivial matters,
but to me, a name is very important.  So, here are my questions: 

1)What do you think of this name business?  Do you agree with my opinions?
  Do you think that african-americans should always strive to have a name
  that reflects the african culture of their ancestors? 

2)If you are an african-american, why did you change/not change your
  family name?  Or is their a point to keeping the slaveowner's name?
  kinda like "so that we shall never forget the ordeal that our ancestors
  went through" (akin to Holocaust survivors keeping their tatoos to remind
  the world of their ordeal)

3)Even if one's ancestors were free blacks, don't you think it would be
  good to adopt an African name, so that one can begin the process of
  renewing one's ties to one's roots in Africa?

4)Or do I err in assuming that most african-american's family names of today
  are necessarily that of the slaveowner of the past?
 
Sorry if these questions seem so dumb.  It's just that after reading up on
black history, I wonder why most african-americans don't change their name,
the way some black leaders did in the 60's.  Thank you for your answers.

Disco Junkie 
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american
From: david@gdstech.grumman.com (David Nettles)
Subject: Re: Malcom X School
Reply-To: david@gdstech.UUCP (David Nettles)
Organization: Grumman Data Systems-Woodbury
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 16:25:47 GMT

In article <11235@crackers.clearpoint.com> martillo@nero.clearpoint.com (Joachim Martillo) writes:
>In article <28SEP199210152285@venus.tamu.edu> eah0065@venus.tamu.edu (HASKIN, EDWARD ARTHUR) writes:
>>For years the public education system has been geared to one culture, Eurocentr
>>icism. It's a basic realization that public schools don't serve the needs of
>>many of our African American youth. So why is their a big deal over altering
>>a teaching program that will cater to their specific needs. 
>
>They need to be mainstreamed rather than be indocrinated in
>Afrocentrentic B.S.
>
>>America is so hypocritical when it comes to the idea of the "Melting Pot." 
>>We are finally at a point where African Americans see that the U.S. Public
>>School system is institutionally racist and now there is an effort to show
>>African Americans some sort of pride and self-esteem and Europeans are getting
>>upset. 
>
>Just as Irish, Sicilians, Japanese and Chinese have, Black Americans
>must renounce their mindlessly stupid cultural heritage (just as I
>renounce my mindlessly stupid cultural heritage) and accept civilized
>Western modern culture as their own.
>
>>	I say make public schools cater to African American needs and not just
>>Europeans. 
>
>No better way that American Blacks remain subordinate, oppressed and
>outside the mainstream.  What a bigot Haskin is!  Race is not destiny!
>
>American parochials have no idea what true oppression and racialism
>is.  If you want to learn about true oppression and racialism go live
>in Latin American, Africa, E.Asia, India or the Middle East for a
>decade or so.  The sorts of unpleasantries which occur in the USA are
>truly penny-ante.
>
>>Integration not Assimilation
>
>>Edward A. Haskin
>>Graduate Student
>^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^  Waste of taxpayer money.
>
>-- 
>Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo Ajami
>
>The article represents noone's opinions other than the author's.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Mr. Joachim Carlo Santos Martillo Ajami, you are a waste of bandwidth.

-- 
****************************************************************************
   David E. Nettles
   Internet: david@gdstech.grumman.com
   Grumman Data Systems
Newsgroups: soc.culture.african.american