So racism, that's a paradigm thing apparently. I would have thought it's a personal choice but apparently how one man feels about others around him means **** all and it's all about systems and power.
But Africa was first and I don't mean that in some kind of vacuum. You don't know the name Andromeda from Ethiopian texts, she was their princess though. That name and her popularity are due to the Greeks and the Greeks having envied Ethiopia.
Boxing isn't really about geopolitics but you can't get through your ancient boxers without some mention of the land of wealth, power, and magic. Because they had more gold, their kings ruled with more impunity, and they had better tech the Greeks could not yet understand.
So, any Greek passage dated in that era that would be perceived as racism by modern eyes is not racism actually because the Greeks did not yet establish themselves as the power peoples of the known world. Racism in that era has to be Africans against Euros, right?
Or is racism only something that happens when white people control ****?
On that, how many millennia of genocides against cousin tribes over cultural disputes rather than pragmatism is required for Africans like Ethiopians, Sudanese, and Egyptians to lose their place on the global stage and there by doom black peoples to being controlled by whites? What is racism during this time? During the shift when Europeans were only powerful enough to set up coastal outposts and make deals with African leaders, who is the racist? Can I define it in aggression as much as systems or must systems be in place prior for racism to exist?
Clearly it is impossible for a christian white spanish to be racist while ****** black moors rule him. Was he racist when he achieved freedom from Moors? At what point in Spaniards driving out African invaders is it safe to say the Spanish were racist? What point is it safe to say the Moors are racist?
Then when the Iberian Empire claimed control over Africa but only actually controlled tiny outposts dotting the map, they were aggressive with their African hosts but hardly could one claim they had power over the Africans or any form of system unfair to African established. Was it racism or just racial prejudice?
Why doesn't power and collectivism have any place outside of race and *** debates?
Once fat people were ***y. Now fat people are ugly. I may feel bad on a personal level for an individual fatman going throw judgement only because he's fat. Do I feel for fat people as a whole? I mean should I? Are there set judgments for all demographics based on power?
Christians are actually the demographic that controls everything. If you're going to lump people together, judge them based off how well they fit into a demographic, and demonize them for being part of that demographic, outside of it being, ya know, hard to convince black christians christianity has done nothing good for them, why is there no stole us from our land, forced your god on us, and took our culture style stuff being hurled at Christianity? It may not be as centralized as just a denomination, but, certainly far more centralized with more clear figure heads than just saying "white people". Systemic? Do married peoples get a different kind of taxing? So it is systemic.
I have a hard time wrapping my head around this idea my personal beliefs no longer matter and we're all judged on collectivism except for basically any collective that doesn't have anything to do with race or ***. Seems like if there was more than bull**** landing on hungry ears who want anything to argue with then the thought would permeate to where it naturally fits.
I can think of a ton of paradigm shifts in history. Plenty has nothing to do with race or gender in any way.....seems like no one gives a **** about those though. Wonder why?
I also can't get my head around white privilege. Maybe it's been abused from its intended meaning? There is privilege beyond white. I get to do **** other white dudes never will. I have a privilege most will never experience. Ted gets a promotion over Jamal at DQ because white privilege, okay. Adam gets to be crass with NASA because white privilege? But there's only white dudes in the room. Maybe individualism is a privilege? Representing a collective as NASA suits do does put them at a disadvantage. I can rude, crass, clearly not listening, and basically as petulant as I want to be because who do I represent and who do they? Exactly, shackled to the collective, they have a kind of privilege but it is weak compared to my own and I will flex that when I decide to in any meeting. White privilege? Man you just scratching the surface. Yes, I am white, I am straight, I am American, and I am a patented inventor. IMO those are the levels of my privilege as well. Do I make out better as a honk? Yes, I know because I can see faces when they find out I am puerto rican. Some folks can't hide they just want euro pures around them or that they been tricked by my Euro features. Do I do better as a straight? Yup, I sell ****** ****, they want the straight perspective. How about American? I don't give a **** if you're English or Chinese or some other very well-developed nation with loads of trade ties, I get access first, period. You work with my leftovers and that's just the truth. But is that the height of my privileges?
What forces anti-PR people deal with me? What makes ******** uncomfortable with CIS people comfortable with me? What makes the world who spends quite a lot of their time demonizing the USA come to me? That mother ****ing last level of privilege ennit? Them patents son. Whole different level of privilege "white" can't even begin to **** with. So, no, it ain't the privilege that bothers me. It's the idea y'all think white privilege is so powerful. White privilege ain't **** which is why all the poor white people hate being told they got privilege. It's not really privilege it's y'all living some sad ass lives. A peasant who is paid to shovel **** is more privileged than a peasant who has to starve because they can't get a job, sure, more, I wouldn't call either privileged though.
But Africa was first and I don't mean that in some kind of vacuum. You don't know the name Andromeda from Ethiopian texts, she was their princess though. That name and her popularity are due to the Greeks and the Greeks having envied Ethiopia.
Boxing isn't really about geopolitics but you can't get through your ancient boxers without some mention of the land of wealth, power, and magic. Because they had more gold, their kings ruled with more impunity, and they had better tech the Greeks could not yet understand.
So, any Greek passage dated in that era that would be perceived as racism by modern eyes is not racism actually because the Greeks did not yet establish themselves as the power peoples of the known world. Racism in that era has to be Africans against Euros, right?
Or is racism only something that happens when white people control ****?
On that, how many millennia of genocides against cousin tribes over cultural disputes rather than pragmatism is required for Africans like Ethiopians, Sudanese, and Egyptians to lose their place on the global stage and there by doom black peoples to being controlled by whites? What is racism during this time? During the shift when Europeans were only powerful enough to set up coastal outposts and make deals with African leaders, who is the racist? Can I define it in aggression as much as systems or must systems be in place prior for racism to exist?
Clearly it is impossible for a christian white spanish to be racist while ****** black moors rule him. Was he racist when he achieved freedom from Moors? At what point in Spaniards driving out African invaders is it safe to say the Spanish were racist? What point is it safe to say the Moors are racist?
Then when the Iberian Empire claimed control over Africa but only actually controlled tiny outposts dotting the map, they were aggressive with their African hosts but hardly could one claim they had power over the Africans or any form of system unfair to African established. Was it racism or just racial prejudice?
Why doesn't power and collectivism have any place outside of race and *** debates?
Once fat people were ***y. Now fat people are ugly. I may feel bad on a personal level for an individual fatman going throw judgement only because he's fat. Do I feel for fat people as a whole? I mean should I? Are there set judgments for all demographics based on power?
Christians are actually the demographic that controls everything. If you're going to lump people together, judge them based off how well they fit into a demographic, and demonize them for being part of that demographic, outside of it being, ya know, hard to convince black christians christianity has done nothing good for them, why is there no stole us from our land, forced your god on us, and took our culture style stuff being hurled at Christianity? It may not be as centralized as just a denomination, but, certainly far more centralized with more clear figure heads than just saying "white people". Systemic? Do married peoples get a different kind of taxing? So it is systemic.
I have a hard time wrapping my head around this idea my personal beliefs no longer matter and we're all judged on collectivism except for basically any collective that doesn't have anything to do with race or ***. Seems like if there was more than bull**** landing on hungry ears who want anything to argue with then the thought would permeate to where it naturally fits.
I can think of a ton of paradigm shifts in history. Plenty has nothing to do with race or gender in any way.....seems like no one gives a **** about those though. Wonder why?
I also can't get my head around white privilege. Maybe it's been abused from its intended meaning? There is privilege beyond white. I get to do **** other white dudes never will. I have a privilege most will never experience. Ted gets a promotion over Jamal at DQ because white privilege, okay. Adam gets to be crass with NASA because white privilege? But there's only white dudes in the room. Maybe individualism is a privilege? Representing a collective as NASA suits do does put them at a disadvantage. I can rude, crass, clearly not listening, and basically as petulant as I want to be because who do I represent and who do they? Exactly, shackled to the collective, they have a kind of privilege but it is weak compared to my own and I will flex that when I decide to in any meeting. White privilege? Man you just scratching the surface. Yes, I am white, I am straight, I am American, and I am a patented inventor. IMO those are the levels of my privilege as well. Do I make out better as a honk? Yes, I know because I can see faces when they find out I am puerto rican. Some folks can't hide they just want euro pures around them or that they been tricked by my Euro features. Do I do better as a straight? Yup, I sell ****** ****, they want the straight perspective. How about American? I don't give a **** if you're English or Chinese or some other very well-developed nation with loads of trade ties, I get access first, period. You work with my leftovers and that's just the truth. But is that the height of my privileges?
What forces anti-PR people deal with me? What makes ******** uncomfortable with CIS people comfortable with me? What makes the world who spends quite a lot of their time demonizing the USA come to me? That mother ****ing last level of privilege ennit? Them patents son. Whole different level of privilege "white" can't even begin to **** with. So, no, it ain't the privilege that bothers me. It's the idea y'all think white privilege is so powerful. White privilege ain't **** which is why all the poor white people hate being told they got privilege. It's not really privilege it's y'all living some sad ass lives. A peasant who is paid to shovel **** is more privileged than a peasant who has to starve because they can't get a job, sure, more, I wouldn't call either privileged though.
siablo14
Comment