Does Black Beast prove Tyrun wrong about racist UFC fans

Honestly, i dont care. This isnt a race relations site, and im completely over this topic. Sorry if that hurt your feelings.

You're right. This is not a race relations site and MMA itself has nothing to do with race. I honestly can't figure out why liberals, social justice warriors, and Afrocentrics are so determined to tie the two of them together. It's almost as if you all enjoy creating faux problems and dividing people along racial lines. Nah! That can't be true.
 
You're right. This is not a race relations site and MMA itself has nothing to do with race. I honestly can't figure out why liberals, social justice warriors, and Afrocentrics are so determined to tie the two of them together. It's almost as if you all enjoy creating faux problems and dividing people along racial lines. Nah! That can't be true.

Man you cry like a bitch, shut up dude. No one even cares about this anymore.
 
Honestly, i dont care. This isnt a race relations site, and im completely over this topic. Sorry if that hurt your feelings.

It isn't a crying like a baby site either but that hasn't been stopping you.
 
Martin Luther King and Malcom X are great examples of progress and are Civil Rights heros. Guys like Al Sharpton and college students demanding segregated spaces is not. No matter what happens there is no way the United States would ever regress back to the attitude it had pre Civil rights. If anything groups like BLM and race baiting leaders on the far left are doing more harm than good.
Muhammad Ali family was just stopped at an airport because of their last name. All American born with family history going back to the 1600's in the U.S. Trump who's the President said he would like to make stop and frisk. How in the hell is BLM worst than that?
 
Actually, for the most part blacks didn't fight. Instead they appealed to the consciences of their white fellow Americans, and that was extremely effective.

martin-luther-king-jr-9365086-2-402.jpg
And were murdered for it. What made the civil rights movement(somewhat of) an success was not appealing for fellow white american consciences, it was the U.S looking like giant hypocrites promoting freedoms of the West vs. Communism yet their 2nd largest population group, a population that was in the U.S longer than most other Americas could be killed for not letting a white person have the right of way in traffic. Also by fighting I mean all elements civil rights movement. But now you have an Attorney General who Mrs. King fought against, you have the right fighting to end voter rights, talks about a national Stop and Frisk policy, etc etc.
 
And were murdered for it. What made the civil rights movement(somewhat of) an success was not appealing for fellow white american consciences, it was the U.S looking like giant hypocrites promoting freedoms of the West vs. Communism yet their 2nd largest population group, a population that was in the U.S longer than most other Americas could be killed for not letting a white person have the right of way in traffic. Also by fighting I mean all elements civil rights movement. But now you have an Attorney General who Mrs. King fought against, you have the right fighting to end voter rights, talks about a national Stop and Frisk policy, etc etc.

No, it was certainly the western conscience nurtured on the idea of freedom for all that was affected. Which is why non-violent protests have such a long history of working well in places like the US and Britain, but not so much in places like China or the USSR. Even if some of it were to avoid looking like hypocrites, that shows that an awareness grew that there was an unacceptable margin between professed values and actual behavior.

Sadly, this noble and effective strategy has long since been abandoned by the perverse civil rights movements of today.
 
No, it was certainly the western conscience nurtured on the idea of freedom for all that was affected. Which is why non-violent protests have such a long history of working well in places like the US and Britain, but not so much in places like China or the USSR. Even if some of it were to avoid looking like hypocrites, that shows that an awareness grew that there was an unacceptable margin between professed values and actual behavior.

Sadly, this noble and effective strategy has long since been abandoned by the perverse civil rights movements of today.
That's the thing, it doesn't have a long history in the U.S or Britain. The Civil war happen in the U.S. Haiti had to kick France, Britain, and the Spanish ass, etc etc. The awareness was that if the U.S is viewed has hypocrites that most of the world would side with the communist philosophy which would lower the U.S standing on the worlds stage.
 
That's the thing, it doesn't have a long history in the U.S or Britain. The Civil war happen in the U.S. Haiti had to kick France, Britain, and the Spanish ass, etc etc. The awareness was that if the U.S is viewed has hypocrites that most of the world would side with the communist philosophy which would lower the U.S standing on the worlds stage.

Can you point to any public statements by civil rights era leaders pointing out the problem of hypocrisy strengthening the Soviets? Perhaps it was a motive to some, but it is preposterous to think that the Civil Rights Movement was successful because of external as opposed to internal US dynamics.
 
Can you point to any public statements by civil rights era leaders pointing out the problem of hypocrisy strengthening the Soviets? Perhaps it was a motive to some, but it is preposterous to think that the Civil Rights Movement was successful because of external as opposed to internal US dynamics.
See the Cia assassinations in Africa, Caribbean, South America, and wars in Asia. Also most civil right leaders were watched by the FBI and labeled as commies.
 
See the Cia assassinations in Africa, Caribbean, South America, and wars in Asia. Also most civil right leaders were watched by the FBI and labeled as commies.
Irrelevant. I'm aware that Robert Kennedy had the FBI keep tabs on Dr. King and tap his phone. How does any of that negate that the American Civil Rights leaders wisely and effectively targeted the conscience of the American majority rather than turning to violence to achieve their aims.

Your views, at least as stated, are incoherent.
 
Last edited:
Irrelevant. I'm aware that Robert Kennedy had the FBI keep tabs on Dr. King and tap his phone. How does any of that show that the American Civil Rights leaders wisely and effectively targeted the conscience of the American majority rather than turning to violence to achieve their aims.

Your views, at least as stated, are incoherent.
If a vote was held to end Jim Crow prior to the Civil rights act, the vote would of lost. The Federal government ended Jim Crow, not the "people". So if it was the leaders of the Civil rights movement only goal was to appeal to the conscience of the white american then they failed. Thankfully that wasn't the only goal.
 
If a vote was held to end Jim Crow prior to the Civil rights act, the vote would of lost. The Federal government ended Jim Crow, not the "people". So if it was the leaders of the Civil rights movement only goal was to appeal to the conscience of the white american then they failed. Thankfully that wasn't the only goal.

You have it ass-backwards. Congress took action when large majorities of whites in most states had begun changing their views. Remember, Congress was Dem majority at that time, and the Dems had always been the Jim Crow party. They changed their minds because even in the American South, their constituents were demanding action. The Civil Rights Act was an effect, not the cause of the sea change in racial views held by Americans.

What books have you read on this subject?
 
My point was Micheal Jordan is a well spoken, educated, and free speaking black man and everybody loved him. It's actually just the opposite of what you're saying.

What would some racist prick rather watch Soul Train or the Cosby Show? The answer is neither because he/she doesn't like black people based on the color of their skin.

And if you want to dive deeper wouldn't a racist rather listen to a black man that speaks with a white dialect, because in his/hers eyes he would be more "civil"

No Jordan was not a "free speaking black man", he actually caught flack for decades for the exact opposite from many black people. Jordan never ever spoke out on black issues, he tucked his tail and hid from ever commenting on anything controversial that would hurt him in non black people eyes. Just in recent times has Jordan finally started stepping out on such issues.
 
SJWoodley would just say that we're racist for liking a guy who acts like a stereotype.

it seems to me that Lewis speaks and thinks like a lot of people that i know.
it seems to me that at the end of the day Lewis is a normal person, idk what sterotype you mean.
 
Back
Top