From: txam1@isuvax.iastate.edu
Subject: Re: Racism in SF2
Reply-To: txam1@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 10:09:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.032112.10130@mercury.unt.edu>, west@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Bruce West) writes:
>In article <Bxvqqq.M8J@news.iastate.edu> txam1@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
>>In article <1992Nov17.154247.1428@mercury.unt.edu>, west@ponder.csci.unt.edu (Bruce West) writes:
>[my freedom of speech/Howard Stern deleted]
>>-----Then to comes an issue of the things deemed moral and immoral by the social 
>>majority. You mean to tell me that you think censorship of EVERY kind is
>>wrong? This cannot be. Ok what if the KKK was aloud to put up bilboards>
>   FUCK YES!  Who is to say what people are allowed to say!  You are going
>down a dangerous road when you decide who is social correct.
>--Not really. After all this debating back and forth (with is good for both
of us i think) I have come to the realization that both points have
shown some redundance and miscommunication. Well i can say that i havent
acurately been conveying what i mean. Think about this. In one instance
if the majority feels that it should set laws on the premise of social
acceptance of the majority we can get alot of progress and the people
as a whole are more satisfied. Even if the decision of the majority is
self intrested or illogical the people as a whole are still happy.
Say that whatever this law is has a greater effect on the minority and
it is detrimental to there survival (whether it be economic or other wise).
Ex. seperate and unequal schooling for African American children in the
south (pre- Brown v. Board). America as a whole was happy but, did not see
the long-term danger or the stupidity of this system. If we dont have rules
set on social acceptance we have mass hysteria and chaos. If we do we 
have potential social and political uprisings that eventually lead to 
bloodshed. There are two sides to any point. Would you like it if you
sent your children to my school and i told them things ,on a daily basis,
that where inconsistent with your morals? If you cant afford another school
what do you do? Now i ask you again do these laws have a place in the
government that you want?

>>all over the United States, somehow get control of a couple of networks,
>>and gain greater political and social infulence than they hold now?
>
>   Faulty premise.  I said they can SAY whatever they want.  This does not
>mean in anyway they would gain political control or social influence.  I
>would hope most people would dismiss them.  But they MUST be allowed to
>speak.  DON'T DRAW THE LINE - IT WILL BE MOVED ON YOU!

__That's my point also. Do you realize the power of hate groups in this
country? If PC didnt exist do you realize how much the children of our
society would be subjected to this bullshit? The views of most people in our
society have been taught to them. Believe it or not. Whether it be consious
or sub concious most views, Yes yours and mine have been taught to us.
Yes there will always be individuals but the majority will always be
swayed to think in a way that is consistent to the information that the
take in on a daily basis. ALot of these groups already have the econimic
support and political say so to get some of the things they want done
done. PC is the one the only things protecting children from another
era of hatred between the races. I dont want this argument of mine merely
to be narrowed down to the KKK and hate groups. I just want you to know that
this side of the coin DOES exist along with the side you argue for.
>
>   That is ALWAYS the guise of censorship - "to protect you."  And I'll tell
>you what happens to young ones.  They hear a bunch of shit (assuming the
>parents can't protect their little ears).  They say "mommy, mommy,  look at
>that nigger..."  And BOOM!  That kid will understand the parents views on
>the topic and will get the facts.  Then he/she will make up their own mind
>in time [the way it always has been, but we are afraid to admit it].
>What if the child is infulence yet already knows his parents views on 
whatever the subject maybe. (like you said. That just brings forth another
generation of red tape for freedom to fight through. Sure i have the right
or at least should have the right to say whatever the fuck i want. Sureyou
should have that same right i have. But do i have the right to influence the
views, thoughts and morals of those who cant or are incapable of making up
thier own mind? Or at least making a logical, open -eyed desicion on whether
or not my views are right for them? Of course i do. But do you think i should?
I want to know what you think personally of this scenario. Not a general
thought on this type of scenario.

>>You cant overlook the KKK's right to be able to put up a bilboard anywhere
>>they can or want. (within the law of course) What do you think? Cenorship
>>good for the people as a whole or bad for the people as a hole in that case?
>
>   GOOD, and I'll tell you why.  I would hope another group would put up a
>huge billboard next to that one refuting every argument with *fact*.
>This is what we call public debate - and this is how we GET the *evolution*
>you have been wanting.  If we don't talk this out head to head nothing will
>change - you can't run from these idiots, or pretend they don't exist.
>I say: Let em say their peace, and we'll say our peace.  And in the end
>people will see how stupid group X really is.  
>   And I'll tell you another thing - that is sure of a hell a lot better
>than the way people with influence and power now get to sneak their 
>messages into many media forms.  Make it OPEN!  That's what this country is
>about.  I can't remember the last time this country had a serious religous
>debate -- they used to be common.>
Know why? Its becuase religion has been stepped on and spit on the basis of
its demands on modern society. Present interpretations of our constitution
are the cause of this. I am not saying whether or not this right or wrong
just informing you of why i think theyre not common anymore.

>[stuff abut communism and whitebread america deleted]
>[my examples of anti-establishment show deleted]
>>now.I don't like the road it can POTENTIALY head down but i dont believe that
>>it will go that far. The critics are not praising "black movies" becuase they
>
>   The only way to get "freedom" is start with FREEDOM OF SPEECH.  You can't
>get shit till you can ask for it!
>
>>think that they are especially great. Until Malcom X what so called "black
>>movie" actor or cenamatographer was even thought about for an award
>>(other than the color purple which already had been played in by black
>>actors and actress that had already been accepted by white america?
>>Oprah, Danny Glover, Whoopi Goldberg, etc.) of any kind. What else can they do
>
>   Well, I'm not going to judge the US or the people in it by some backward
>Hollywood organanization called the Academy.  
_Why not? That exactly what ourjoke of a government is. A backwards
organization. Wouldnt you judge the US by its government?>
>
>   One could also argue what the hell do the people on the streets of LA
>know about success.  It's the same mentality?
--In additon to that arguement i am sure that whoever argued this point
would mention that these people arent given a fair shot at success wouldnt
they?>
>>
>  Same agument as above.  So I guess nobody from sc LA will be allowed to
>judge how well done Wallstreet or Secret of My Succes was ;)  I don't
>subscribe to the view that "if you've never been..." then you can't talk on
>the issue.  Otherwise blacks CANT talk about whites, and visa versa.  Cause
>neither have ever been the other.  Women shouldn't talk about or judge
>men, and visa versa.  And we should all sit in cubicals - since nobody has
>really had the exact same existance as *you* have (general you).

Not entirely true. You see it is possible to judge someone by the way they 
treat yo. It sounds to me that you are saying that if i killed your brothe out
of hatred or cold blood, that you still wouldnt be qualified to tell your
friends whether i am a nice guy or not? While we havent had the same experience
or existance as one another the things we do that affect each other determine
our respective outlooks one another. Dont you agree?





>  People have got to stop judging books by the cover, and just look at

>people as people.  I personally don't give any shit whatsoever what someone's
>life experience is - it may help me understand one's point of view, but it
>sure as hell doesn't make em right.
>
>>that matter.  Unlimited movies from hollywood had dipicted blacks and
>>other minorities (namely hispanics) as drug dealears, pimps, hookers, maids
>>gangsters, stupid, slang talking, uneducated, (need i go on?). There is no
>>way you can say that this hasnt subconsiouly effected the collective view
>>of whites in this nation. I know it has! Here at Iowa State (a predominantly
>
>   Well, every Italian I see is in the Mafia - hasn't held me back!  I think
>what *does* happen is you a) see all these movies b) an uneducated slang
>talking person of such race come up to you or applies for a job - and you
>make the association.  For example, when I wear my trenchcoat and go out
>at 4 smoking I am often seen as a gangster (big resemblence in build).  But
>when I get into the professional arena I am a different person - and that
>association is never made!


And i'll bet the wa you dress and the things you say don significantly
separate you from the dress and view of most people in your workplace
right or wrong?



>   One of the major problems *is* there are too many slang talking uneducated
>minorities!  Take for example surfers, "hey dude."  When I moved to TX all I
>had to say is I was from CA and say "hey dude" and BOOM - I was a stupid
>surfer guy.  If I don't do that then the association is never made.  ie.
>Ever see Die Hard.  The black hacker in that could never in a million
>years be called a thug.  If he went in for a job he would have no problem.
>What the problem is many black people would call him *white*. Why, I dunno.
>(I say this cause I was watching it yesterday and noticed this)
---If all these "slang talking, uneducated minorities where given half
a chance on all levels to be a Grammatically Sound and as Learned as most
whites in this country then you wouldnt think that way. MY life hasnt been
that hard. I am not gonna get on a soap box and say that i have lived the hard
life because i havent. But i am close enough to the root apethy and social
frustration in this country to see that its not the same for everyone.
You are kidding yourself if you think it is.
>
>>white Universty, a false sense of fear, distrust, and superiority still
>>exists among many. If you need examples you obviosly want to read a novel of
>
>   Well, I can say I have NEVER seen such a group of racist blacks as in
>college (back when I was at UT).  You would walk out of Jester dorm (3000
>people) and it was the African nation.  Not a single black talking to a 
>white guy.  They just formed in huge groups for you to wade through, they
>gave you dirty lucks as you brushed against them, it was sick.  Not a one
>of them speaking decent English.  THIS IS COLLEGE.  The open mind discussion
>of the world forum!  And there was this intense close-mindedness.
(racism-- The practice of systematic discriminatory actions of one race to
another. Racism can only be practiced on a race of lesser power or influence.
_That is the definition that was given to me by my Poli Sci professor of the
meaning of racism. What you are witnessing is the ramifacations of the fucked
up system that we have in america. What you heard was not meant to please
or appeal to the ears of mainstream america. The way that black people
generally speak to each othr is brought about by a combination, or social
isolation, lack of education, and in some instances a form of pride
in a form of communication that they can call thier own. All the unrest you
see in the eyes of black people today is due to frustration and anger.
You just happen to fit the description of the perpatrator. (literally speaking)
And on the close-mindedness thing. Black people are speaking its just that
they cant be heard in some places and in other places people arent listning.
Again this leads to frustration. You turn your back to my ideas i turn my 
back on your ideas. I am sure that this is not the feeling of every black
person on that campus, but you must remember they are bound by the same
social pressures that kept many white afraid to speak out against slavery
in thier community. Not many people are willing to risk bieng an outcast
just to gaint the support or even the acceptance and the respect of another
race with a generally differing viewpoint.

>   I say this cause my Mexican girlfriend pointed something outrageous to me.
>Blacks make up 2% of the UT population (50k students), Hispanics 14%!!!
>And believe me, nobody would ever have thought that.  They essencially
>took over the place to show that they could - they were loud, obnoxious,
>elitist, supremist, and forced you to see em.  You couldn't even watch
>TV in the lounge cause the backlog from the entrance went all the way into
>the lounge - so you couldn't hear the TV at full blast!

--No angry person can think clearly. If blacks at your school flet justly
treated there would be no problems i am sure. 

>   I am in no way saying this is indicitive of blacks in general.  But I *am*
>saying their is a serious anti-everybodybutblack movement out there - and
>I think it is being called "black pride" (bullshit).  I'll tell you I don't
>even know if I have Italian pride cause I've never thought of it - but I
>know I have pride in myself, and that's enough.  We need to start teaching
>people that people are just that.  Everyone is a *person* and should be
>treated as such.  This message has obviously been concentrated too much on
>the white population - cause many blacks have missed the boat.  I really
>think Martin Luther King would be ashamed of the official actions of the
>black race today.
--What exactly are the official actions of the black race? For one thing
i must tell you that if Martin Luther King were alive today he would not
be able to get much done. (In my opinion) There are plenty of people
out there with the same message that Martin Luther King preaches.
example: Jesse Jackson, while jesse jackson is a positive figure for blacks
and white alike. His goals and actions are severly retarded by the fact
that he is a political leader rather than a social leader. Sure there
are black hate groups out there. And they hate white people becuase the
black man has been and still is the subject of the white mans hatred and
manipulation. Like i said for some people the rate we are going is too slow.
Revolution is in the making. I do not advocate hatred, but i personally think
that this system is so screwed up that we have no hope of changing it
from the inside. I personally feel that the black man unfortunately, doesnt
have a place in this country as an equal. Not that we dont deserve it.
Not that we shouldnt have it. But i think that africa is more important.
That does NOT mean that i hate whites. That doesnt mean i hate anyone.
I just dont think we are getting anywhere here. I just seems illogical
to me that we as people sit here and fight for equality as 14% of the pop.
But that's not the way it is. Back to blacks in general. Hate breeds hate.
How can you expect love from a people that is treated like shit in this
country? Not saying that we all shouldnt love each other. But that is too 
broad a solution. Heck if we all loved each other there would be no problems
in the world.


>>some sort cuz i could go on an on (like am doing anyway). For a time
>>the only Blacks you could see on the news where getting arrested (with minor
>>exeptions). Who controls all this? 
>
>   I have no idea.  People who control tv put on tv what they *think* you
>want.  This is a good example of why PC is bad.  Say those same people in
>charge of TV were in charge of the PC guidelines.  And they thought everyone
>thought blacks only get arrested and nobody minded.  Maybe you would be 
>singing a different tune?  Maybe you would think it was a tad racist even.
>Believe these things always get back to be controlled by the people in
>power -- FIGHT THE ROOT CAUSE!  Stamp out censorship!
__It already like that. Take a look at the prisons across the country.
The system is more than a tad racist. I agree that most people in jail
are there because they should be. Commit a crime. Go to jail. But how
many of those people would be in there if they where white?
NO WHITE MAN HAS EVER (and i repeat EVER!) gone to the electric chair or
served a life sentence for the murder of a black man or woman. You probably
didnt think that was possible but it the truth. Look it up. Ask a judge.
But anyways. Censorship is bad as a whole. It is bad as an extreme i agree.
But in some cases you must admit it has its place. That unfortunately leads
us back into a moral issue which cant be comprimised so i wont argue further
on this point.>
>[my speech of how PC will come back to haunt us and censor us]
>>againstit.
>>When there is equality there wont be a need for PC. That is my main point.
>>I admit there are groups that are taking PC to extrems out of there own selfish
>>desires. But if the government worked in the way it should have this wouldnt
>>occur. Do you actually believe you can work within this system to create
>
>  EXACTLY!  Fix the governemt - the root cause.  Not the secondary issues.
>
>>change? Not! The government (mainly big business) controls ALL the information
>>we recieve. TV, radio, and the Press. While there may be journalist out there
>
>   EXACTLY!  SO VOTE INDEPENDENT DAMMIT.  It's the same people like you 
>who bitch and moan about not being able to change governemnt -- but then
>they get scared to vote for Perot (Wasted vote), they are scared to vote for
>independents, they are scared to vote against encumbents...and then they say
>"nothing has changed, waaaaaah".
>
>>who have individualized ideas, those ideas still have to go through the top
>>which is unfortunatley controlled by the elite few 85% percent of the
>>major news papers in this country are controlled by 2 people! count them 2!
>>The same guy owns the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, New York Times, the
>>Los Angeles Sun, (need i go on). These guys have the power to influence
>>the way that Mainstreammerica thinks. If you had read in all Newsweek, your
>
>  Well, if people would just take the infinite words of wisdom -- "don't
>believe everything you read" then we wouldn't have a problem.  Go out
>and get your own facts.  Or get them from different sources and draw your
>own conclusions.
>
>>major paper, and saw on televison that Clinton's raped at young girl when
>>he was 27 woul he be president? Nope. The point is this. PC like everything
>
>  Don't get me started on Clinton ;)  I see him akin to PC, he's like
>bringing a knife to a gunfight.
>__The only connection Clinton has to PC is the fucking lobbyist and intrest
groups that have him by the balls because of thier investment into his campaign
I would never use his beliefs or principals as a basis of an argument.


>>else has its bad and good points. It is just a PHASE (in my opinion).
>>The system of behind the scences political control, lobbyists, and special
>>intrest groups is in tact so stongly that a vote of any kind will not 
>>restore or do anything for this country that will be suffiently positive
>>enough to bring any kind of real political power to the common man.
>
>  Elect a fucking common man - it's not that tough.  While everyone is out
>there whining and saying "when will we have a black woman president" - why
>don't we worry about getting some common people up there!  Intelligent,
>succesful people who arn't politicans and know what needs to be done.
>Get involved in United We Stand (can't say that enough).  We're going for
>congress in 94!  This is a fucking revolution - and hopefully we can have
>a "bloodless revolution" one of the years.  When we take our country back 
>through congress and the president.
__You just try it. A fucking common man would need money for his campaign
becuase without it he would get torn to pieces by money and power through
the press and others. He would undoubtedly be grabbed by the balls by the same
people that have grabbed every other candidate by the balls for as long as
we have live under the laisez- faire philosophy.
>
>>When i say revolution people automatically think violence. This is not 
>>nessicarily the case. Although it may be required to bring change its not
>>completely nessacary. Revolution is not always bad. Hell its usually good 
>>for that matter. But america has been brought up and socailized to think
>>that in the middle is good left or right is bad. That why many people who
>>may have right or leftist views still consider themselves moderates or liberals
>>and sometimes even conservative. Everyone belives in there own freedom of
>
>   Yep.  this country was founded on the revolution concept.  To paraphrase
>our constitution "if the government fucks you over, kick their ass."
>
>>speech but not everyone doesnt believe in everyonelses freedom of speech.
>>I have a little survey i'll mail you if you want to take the social test
>>to tell you whether or not your views are really true to your political and
>>or social classification. 
>
>  Cool, send it to me (damn, my mail is broke, hmm).  Send it to FC19@vaxa.acs
>..unt.edu.  Although I don't believe in tests I'll check it out.  Exactly,
>that is a problem - we have become too much of a "vote your pocketbook"
>society rather than "vote you principles".  This is much like when you say
>the KKK shouldn't allowed to speak ;) 
>
>[how to change out government]
>>--There has never been freedom of speech. And we are never gonna get it
>>until there is a change made in the government. Freedom of Speech has become
>
>  Yep!  So do what I said up above.
>
>>a moral issue. ANd in that sense it CANT be comprimised. So that fight will go
>>on. True freedom i think is a step in the right dir for freedom of speech.
>>True freedom for all is when everyone can be treated in the same way. By every
>>one else. WHEN everyones mind is free. Then we can start to progress as at 
>>a rate that is unheard of in the minds of this nation's people. 
>
>   OPPOSITE.  We need freedom of speech FIRST.  That's the only way we can
>change people's minds and get all people to be created equal.  Without freedom
>of speech we would never have heard the "I had a dream..." speech!  Who knows
>how many such speeches, and how many Martin Luther Kings have not been allowed
>to speak due to restrictions?  This must be stopped, we need freedom of speech.
(opps i did right that backwards.  Let me enlighten you on Martin Luther King
and his progression. Do you know why he go so much done? He got things done
because he was the lesser of two evils (so to speak). Whites in power realized
that the the socail uprising of blacks was inevitable. Malcom X was waiting
in the wings. If whites in power had any reason to fear Martin Luther King
he wouldnt have gotten to where he got to. There are hundreds of Martin Luther
Kings and Malcom X's out there. They just dont get the publicity that
Malcom and Martin got. And that my friend, is no coincidence. Thats why 
Martin Luther King was made into a martyr. Not that he wasnt a great man.
Its just that his form of change represents a rosey solution to a problem
that cant be solved quite so simply.
>[my governemtn spew again]
>>( I did vote for Perot. But again i dont think that he is the answer. I think
>>that he could offer a change in the way things worked (which is about all your
>>vote can do for you these days anyway. In case you had noticed you vote doesnt
>>mean a damned thing. I voted for Perot cuz i feel at least he has the money
>>and the power to speak for himself and think for himself. Right now Clinton
>>does not give a fuck about you and me. He is worring about how he is gonna
>>fulfill his obligations to all the rich mutherfuckers that donated money to his
>
>   If we could elect Perot, and a whole slew of non-politician congressman,
>you would have your revolution!  Imagine no more minority/majority leaders!
>No more Rep/Dem seperated areas in congress.  No more bullshit!  I wanna
>hear the fucking bad news!  Then lets go at step by step.  10 to 1 there
>is so much shit happening we are clueless about its rediculous!  Who the
>hell ever heard of an 800+ page budget?!?!?  And no line item vetoe?!?!
>--Agreed

>
>>>>Jason Gregory
>>>>So. Political Science
>>>>Iowa State University
>
>
>Jason West
>CS
>
>>>pps:  Don't respond by email -- i don't get my mail right now for some reason.
>>
>
>
Newsgroups: alt.games.sf2