Solving minorities' problems once and for all.

[Mouthwash]

I submit that everyone of ethnic African descent (essentially anyone "black"- possibly Latinos as well) should be given areas in which only they can live and work. Whites, Asians, Indians, and anyone else who does not qualify as "black" would be barred from living there and could only enter as tourists, whereas black people, of course, would be able to live and work outside the reserves if they wanted to. My rationale is that it is impossible to integrate black society with WASP society due to the mental barriers preventing us from seeing people from different races as "our own." If one notices that in practice black people live together in black neighborhoods, and almost always marry other black people, this divide becomes more evident.

But what is this solving?

I believe that integration with white society is the root of most problems in the black community. If you've ever thought about it (assuming you are white), it's incredibly easy, with a stretch of the imagination, to view black people as subhuman (as their features are psychological alien to us) and presumably vice-versa. This causes discrimination and fosters division in society (if you need obvious examples, try this convenient slideshow). I submit that black police officers would have a far easier time enforcing order and mediating conflict in a black community than a white police officer would.

Moreover, when black people collectively organize themselves without legal divisions protecting them as well, it becomes easier to discriminate, as they tend to be poorer and their communities simply aren't invested in. It's a self-feeding cycle.

Of course, one could argue that if a person grew up around a smooth mixture of races, they would develop psychological connections to all of them, but that's just the point- they don't. Blacks gravitate towards each other even in a society where discrimination of any kind is taboo. I, however, see discrimination as a normal and inevitable product of human psychology.

But isn't this racist?

As per definition, "racism is usually defined as views, practices and actions reflecting the belief that humanity is divided into distinct biological groups called races and that members of a certain race share certain attributes which make that group as a whole less desirable, more desirable, inferior or superior."

My proposal is not predicated on actual biological differences inherent to races that make Africans undesirable, hence my ideas are by definition not racist.

You're wrong about inherent racial divisions! My community is perfectly integrated and race isn't even a factor.

Yeah, and Polish aristocrats spoke French. There always a class which was above national or ethnic divisions and saw themselves as the same people.

What rights will blacks have under this system?

All of them! At least, all of the ones they do now. They will be granted full citizenship of their own territories as well as of the United States, with voting rights and military obligations (although the black communities will have the right to form their own governments, adjudicate legal cases and levy taxes within their borders, and have self-determination and autonomy to a large extent). The federal government will have a responsibility to protect their lands, assets, resources and treaty rights. Blacks will still be able to run for any federal office.

If this still seems quasi-racist to you, I'd like you to point out what the fundamental differences are between this system and a little thing we call Indian reservations.
And may the flame wars begin.

 

[Lord of Elves]

So what you are proposing is apartheid South Africa's homelands.

 

[Mouthwash]

So what you are proposing is apartheid South Africa's homelands.

I don't recall advocating a caste system of any sort (I knew the first poster would say the words "South Africa" at some point). By the way, you should check this out.

 

[potatokiosk]

My general impression is that the only successful Indian reservations are the ones with casinos. Either the Indians do very well because the casino privileges basically print money for them, or they live in a poverty-stricken alcoholic hellhole. If you want the government to provide blacks with a similar institutional advantage comparable to the indian casinos, there are simpler ways of doing so like the suggestion of reparations payments from the government.

Also, I do believe white people are allowed to live on Indian reservations. They just have no incentive to because they are poverty-stricken hellholes.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Have you ever actually had a conversation with a black person/ever had contact with an African American in any physical sense? As incredibly strange as the idea is to me, the way you have written about African Americans seems to suggest you've never actually dealt with any.

If you have, how did you happen upon this impression that African Americans have not successfully integrated into "white society"?

EDIT: If you think caste system = apartheid homelands then you do not understand apartheid at all.

 

[Mouthwash]

Have you ever actually had a conversation with a black person/ever had contact with an African American in any physical sense? As incredibly strange as the idea is to me, the way you have written about African Americans seems to suggest you've never actually dealt with any.

If you have, how did you happen upon this impression that African Americans have not successfully integrated into "white society"?

The slideshow which you should maybe look at?

EDIT: If you think caste system = apartheid homelands then you do not understand apartheid at all.

I didn't say so, rather, I suggest that the caste system was the main characteristic of apartheid which caused it to be immoral. I wouldn't have had a problem with it otherwise because it would just be separating two peoples from each other (as long as the division was not actually based on racism, which it probably would be).

 

[Lord of Elves]

The slideshow which you should maybe look at?

This has absolutely no bearing on whether or not you have ever actually interacted with African Americans. I submit that I suspect that you have not, or otherwise you would find it very difficult to regard seriously the idea that anyone would regard them as inhuman or "other". In fact, I submit that your entire line of thought is irreconcilable with and fundamentally impossible within the context of the lives of most Americans, who (in my experience), live in contact with African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and various other shades and factions of Americans of non-European descent.

This is plain and simple prejudice, and unacceptable to a country that at least pretends to embrace freedom and unity as its primary descriptors. What you are proposing is the creation of apartheid-esque tyranny.

I didn't say so, rather that the caste system was the main characteristic of apartheid which caused it to be immoral. I wouldn't have had a problem with it otherwise because it would just be separating two peoples from each other (as long as the division was not actually based on racism, which it probably would be).

Apartheid was not a caste system, at least not in the sense you seem to be implying. Apartheid was the system of socioeconomic wage-slavery and political repression created in order to maintain at all costs the socioeconomic superiority and power of South Africa's white population. There is a fundamental difference inherent in this, as it was not a social system of division, but a legally-enshrined code designed to keep South Africa's blacks in economic and political servitude to the white population.

 

[Mouthwash]

My general impression is that the only successful Indian reservations are the ones with casinos. Either the Indians do very well because the casino privileges basically print money for them, or they live in a poverty-stricken alcoholic hellhole. If you want the government to provide blacks with a similar institutional advantage comparable to the indian casinos, there are simpler ways of doing so like the suggestion of reparations payments from the government.

Ask yourself this- why are they poverty-stricken hellholes?

Also, I do believe white people are allowed to live on Indian reservations. They just have no incentive to because they are poverty-stricken hellholes.

That's not my understanding of it. Sure, non-Indians (oh, I can't stand the word) can live there if they intermarry or if they have permission from the reservation, but neither one would be forbidden under my plan. Maybe I didn't make that clear.

 

[Tee Kay]

My general impression is that the only successful Indian reservations are the ones with casinos. Either the Indians do very well because the casino privileges basically print money for them, or they live in a poverty-stricken alcoholic hellhole. If you want the government to provide blacks with a similar institutional advantage comparable to the indian casinos, there are simpler ways of doing so like the suggestion of reparations payments from the government.

Also, I do believe white people are allowed to live on Indian reservations. They just have no incentive to because they are poverty-stricken hellholes.

Incidentally, arguably the most successful, economically, politically and culturally, Indian nations are the Cherokees, who are also one of the most integrated into mainstream American society.

Why would you hold up Indian Reservations, a controversial, deeply-flawed, and almost universally unsuccessful concept, as a model for Black American development, I don't know.

 

[Mouthwash]

This has absolutely no bearing on whether or not you have ever actually interacted with African Americans. I submit that I suspect that you have not, or otherwise you would find it very difficult to regard seriously the idea that anyone would regard them as inhuman or "other". In fact, I submit that your entire line of thought is irreconcilable with and fundamentally impossible within the context of the lives of most Americans, who (in my experience), live in contact with African Americans, Asian Americans, Hispanic Americans, and various other shades and factions of Americans of non-European descent.

Yes, I live in Georgia. I'm not saying that we don't consciously classify the other race as human, but that we have harder times empathizing with them and living among each other. You seem to be taking my train of thought way too literally.

This is plain and simple prejudice, and unacceptable to a country that at least pretends to embrace freedom and unity as its primary descriptors. What you are proposing is the creation of apartheid-esque tyranny.

Your first sentence is a series of bare assertions and emotional reasoning, and as for the second, it matters little if it "resembles" segregation (remember the noncentral fallacy). The point of this is to improve the living standards of black people and give them an identity.

Apartheid was not a caste system, at least not in the sense you seem to be implying. Apartheid was the system of socioeconomic wage-slavery and political repression created in order to maintain at all costs the socioeconomic superiority and power of South Africa's white population. There is a fundamental difference inherent in this, as it was not a social system of division, but a legally-enshrined code designed to keep South Africa's blacks in economic and political servitude to the white population.

I don't know how you're defining caste system, but that would certainly fall under my own definition of it.

I would in fact prefer that this remain civilized, so let's try to engage each rather than screaming "apartheid" and making common-sense appeals, shall we?

Why would you hold up Indian Reservations, a controversial, deeply-flawed, and almost universally unsuccessful concept, as a model for Black American development, I don't know.

Just throwing the idea out there.

 

[Tee Kay]

The point of this is to improve the living standards of black people and give them an identity.

I still don't see how taking a historically and currently economically disadvantaged people, and placing them in a position that restricts their interactions with the wider society, is going to hellp them economically.

Identity... I think Black identity is already pretty well established.

I would in fact prefer that this remain civilized, so let's try to engage each rather than screaming "apartheid" and making common-sense appeals, shall we?

Given that Apartheid is a recognised violation of human rights and crime under international law, if this is indeed Apartheid (and it sure quacks like Apartheid) then I think it is quite relevant to the discussion.

 

[Lord of Elves]

Yes, I live in Georgia. I'm not saying that we don't consciously classify the other race as human, but that we have harder times empathizing with them and living among each other. You seem to be taking my train of thought way too literally.

The predication of your entire argument is that racial differences between whites and blacks (whatever those meaningless Anglosphere platitudes entail) are too great to be bridged. As you say, that "we have harder times empathizing with them". I say this is false, and submit further that the only person who could ever possibly say this with a straight face is a person who does not have any actual physical contact with other races. You have evaded this point thus far.

Your first sentence is a series of bare assertions and emotional reasoning, and as for the second, it matters little if it "resembles" segregation (remember the noncentral fallacy link I gave). The point of this is to improve the living standards of black people and give them an identity.

I am very familiar with your debate tactics in regards to people making "emotional reasoning" arguments. If you do indeed follow any form of logical formula, which I doubt, it is the coldest and most emotionless one I have ever seen employed. Human differences, which is the matter you seem to want to make grand statements about, are governed primarily by emotion and empathy (as you have referenced). You act as if you have none.

I do not see any reason why "black people" need to have their living standards improved (as a whole), nor why they do not have "an identity". I believe that if there is a homogenous Anglophone American culture then blacks have integrated very successfully into it, as the cultural success of say, rap music, should evince.

I don't know how you're defining caste system, but that would certainly fall under my own definition of it.

I would in fact prefer that this remain civilized, so let's try to engage each rather than screaming "apartheid" and making common-sense appeals, shall we?



Just throwing the idea out there.

I am not "screaming" apartheid. Your so-called "novel" proposal is literally apartheid. These are the exact same policies, with the exact same arguments, undertaken by the apartheid regime of South Africa over the latter half of the 20th century. You are saying nothing new.

 

[Tee Kay]

Moreover, when black people collectively organize themselves without legal divisions protecting them as well, it becomes easier to discriminate, as they tend to be poorer and their communities simply aren't invested in. It's a self-feeding cycle.

Well that's the thing isn't it. What you are proposing is already happening to some extent, just not formally. And it results in poverty and discrimination and social problems. I don't see how writing this into law is going to improve anything.

 

[Tee Kay]

I am not "screaming" apartheid. Your so-called "novel" proposal is literally apartheid. These are the exact same policies, with the exact same arguments, undertaken by the apartheid regime of South Africa over the latter half of the 20th century. You are saying nothing new.

Let's give it another chance, ay? No failed idea can't be improved with a new snazzy logo and a catchy theme tune.

 

[useless]

Mouthwash reminds me of one of those "race realists" (white supremecists/racists) who want all black people to live in Africa, all white people to live in europe and North America, etc.

You even finished with the line "Let the flame wars begin!" which leads me to believe that you KNEW how racist and idiotic this argument would be and is.

Lord of Elves is right, you are basically advocating apartheid.

 

[Mouthwash]

I still don't see how taking a historically and currently economically disadvantaged people, and placing them in a position that restricts their interactions with the wider society, is going to hellp them economically.

Identity... I think Black identity is already pretty well established.

No, under my plan blacks would be free to disseminate throughout society. They would have their own territories to themselves, however.

Given that Apartheid is a recognised violation of human rights and crime under international law, if this is indeed Apartheid (and it sure quacks like Apartheid) then I think it is quite relevant to the discussion.

The only people actually being discriminated against are whites, and this is an Appeal to Law (is that a formal fallacy? I'm not sure, but it still isn't an argument unless we're specifically arguing under a framework of law).

The predication of your entire argument is that racial differences between whites and blacks (whatever those meaningless Anglosphere platitudes entail) are too great to be bridged. As you say, that "we have harder times empathizing with them". I say this is false, and submit further that the only person who could ever possibly say this with a straight face is a person who does not have any actual physical contact with other races. You have evaded this point thus far.

What is there to respond to? Just concentrate on a picture of a black person and presto! you'll eventually see him as an ape in the same way that repeating words over and over cause them to lose their meaning. You can do the same thing with white people, too, but it's much harder if you're white yourself.

I am very familiar with your debate tactics in regards to people making "emotional reasoning" arguments. If you do indeed follow any form of logical formula, which I doubt, it is the coldest and most emotionless one I have ever seen employed. Human differences, which is the matter you seem to want to make grand statements about, are governed primarily by emotion and empathy (as you have referenced). You act as if you have none.

Logic is logic. If one concludes that consequentionalism is the legitimate ethical system, than literally anything is justified as long as it leads a greater result. You may have heard of emotional reasoning, but you sure don't apply it in any real sense. The assertion that logic needs to be rooted in emotion or something is an incredibly bizarre statement to me.

Besides, you've spent your entire life developing cultural taboos to discrimination, so while it may be jarring to hear proposals to violate them put so casually, remember that women's rights would have had the same affect on an ancient Greek.

I do not see any reason why "black people" need to have their living standards improved (as a whole), nor why they do not have "an identity". I believe that if there is a homogenous Anglophone American culture then blacks have integrated very successfully into it, as the cultural success of say, rap music, should evince.

Self-determination.

I am not "screaming" apartheid. Your so-called "novel" proposal is literally apartheid. These are the exact same policies, with the exact same arguments, undertaken by the apartheid regime of South Africa over the latter half of the 20th century. You are saying nothing new.

No, they are not the "exact same policies" because they aren't the same. By definition.

Well that's the thing isn't it. What you are proposing is already happening to some extent, just not formally. And it results in poverty and discrimination and social problems. I don't see how writing this into law is going to improve anything.

You could, I don't know, give reparations to them? Look how well the Palestinians did in the West Bank (they had one of the highest standards of living in the Middle East, and literacy rose continuously) until the Intifada, and even now they still integrate with settlers to a degree.

There are also anthropologists who claim that black people in North America have a distinct quasi-nationality of their own with its center in Haiti. Others claim that Southerners, people from the West Coast, and even New Yorkers do, too.

 

[Mouthwash]

Mouthwash reminds me of one of those "race realists" (white supremecists/racists) who want all black people to live in Africa, all white people to live in europe and North America, etc.

Why don't you go ahead and compare me to Hitler already?

You even finished with the line "Let the flame wars begin!" which leads me to believe that you KNEW how racist and idiotic this argument would be and is.

Lord of Elves is right, you are basically advocating apartheid.

No, I knew how people would respond. Please leave if you have nothing other to do than spew vague insults in my direction.

 

[Lord of Elves]

What is there to respond to? Just concentrate on a picture of a black person and presto! you'll eventually see him as an ape in the same way that repeating words over and over cause them to lose their meaning. You can do the same thing with white people, too, but it's much harder if you're white yourself.

I don't even know what to say in response to this. It's like you're willingly playing into the hands of people who would label you as some kind of horrible racist. Which at this point you might as well be

No, they are not the "exact same policies" because they aren't the same. By definition.

Do you have some kind of allergy to reading? It's like you're giving this speech from some kind of pamphlet.

There are also anthropologists who claim that black people in North America have a distinct quasi-nationality of their own with its center in Haiti. Others claim that Southerners, people from the West Coast, and even New Yorkers do, too.

These are very self-important anthropologists.

EDIT: I don't need some kind of moral relativist, subjective cultural idea to be pushed upon me, I have my own human experience with other human beings who happen to be African American that they are not somehow alien or fundamentally different.

 

[useless]

Why don't you go ahead and compare me to Hitler already?

Hitler didn't want to move all of the jews, he wanted to kill them. You just want blacks to live on their own, god forbid what happens to interracial families/people etc.

No, I knew how people would respond. Please leave if you have nothing other to do than spew vague insults in my direction.

My heart bleeds for you. For all your attempts to be edgy and insulting, you ultimately fail when people call you out on your proposals, just like your advocating of eugenics at one point.

I wasn't vague with my criticisms either and i am going to be honest here Mouthwash, this is an idea i expect someone from Stormfront to make (and they do make them their. See: "Race Realists")

 

[Mouthwash]

I don't even know what to say in response to this. It's like you're willingly playing into the hands of people who would label you as some kind of horrible racist.

Yeah, if you quote-mined my post a bit, you could.

Do you have some kind of allergy to reading? It's like you're giving this speech from some kind of pamphlet.

You said that my policies were "exactly the same" as South Africa's apartheid. Please tell me why that is, because I don't think that the rules are the same. At all.

These are very self-important anthropologists.

Ah, well, they're only "experts," so who really needs them?

EDIT: I don't need some kind of moral relativist, subjective cultural idea to be pushed upon me, I have my own human experience with other human beings who happen to be African American that they are not somehow alien or fundamentally different.

That's not even remotely what I said? Nation, properly defined, refers to a community of people who share a common language, culture, ethnicity, descent, or history. I addressed the anecdotal argument in the OP.