Jesse Williams speech

[Social Distance Warrior]

LOL.

Quote me where I said that any mention of slavery, regardless of context, is divisive and should not be done.

You guys love making fools of yourselves with blatant lies. Typical stuff from you Jack.

Ltitle bitch savage is the most dishonest piece of shit on this forum...

When he's losing an argument (which is often), he'll make up lies.

 

[Jack V Savage]

I'll be sure to quote this next time you have a freak out over a TV segment about Hillary Clinton, you Little Bitch Savage.

Me-ow.

At least you had the guts to respond to me directly this time, champ, though you ignored the substance of the post, as usual.

 

[Bald1]

What does Jesse Williams represent?

A white guy represents "collective global black body anger"? Wtf does that mean?

 

[Madmick]

Me-ow.

At least you had the guts to respond to me directly this time, champ, though you ignored the substance of the post, as usual.

I was about to infract Logical for flaming, but then I saw that above you quite deliberately slandered Dontsnitch and attributed a position to him that he didn't adopt.

I feel that there is balance in the Force as things lie.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

I think his speech was perfectly fine and the backlash here just speaks to the victimhood mentality on this board.

99% of his speech was about telling his audience to take more control of their image, their lives and their communities. That regardless of social circumstances they have a responsibility to themselves. Which is pretty much what people on here constantly complain about except with different language.

Yet because he couched his language in terms of empowerment instead of the more demeaning language you find here, people are criticitizing the underlying message.

I get a lot of our conversations and I do respect your opinion a great deal...

The opening part of his speech I had no problem with...towards the middle I was wondering what all the outrage was about..

It is this part that has angered so many here:

"centuries, yo. And we’re done watching, and waiting while this invention called whiteness uses and abuses us. Burying black people out of sight and out of mind, while extracting our culture, our dollars, our entertainment like oil — black gold. Ghettoizing and demeaning our creations then stealing them. Gentrifying our genius and then trying us on like costumes before discarding our bodies like rinds of strange fruit. The thing is, though, the thing is, that just because we’re magic doesn’t mean we’re not real. Thank you.”

How does this even make sense? Black culture and entertainment or "costumes" as he calls it is marketed to white folk...

And what does he mean by" discarding our bodies"

 

[Jack V Savage]

I was about to infract Logical for flaming, but then I saw that above you quite deliberately slandered Dontsnitch and attributed a position to him that he didn't adopt.

I feel that there is balance in the Force as things lie.

Bullshit on both counts. I didn't slander DS or attribute a position to him that he didn't adopt. Read through the old thread.

And, yeah, I don't expect you to be unbiased or anything. Just clarifying. I linked to a post, and anyone can follow the thread from there. I would never knowingly attribute a position to anyone that they don't hold, and I worked damned hard to get a position out of DS, and it was what I said.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Me-ow.

At least you had the guts to respond to me directly this time, champ, though you ignored the substance of the post, as usual.

If by substance you mean lying and misquoting people intentionally?

Yea I ignored that nonsense

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Bullshit on both counts. I didn't slander DS or attribute a position to him that he didn't adopt. Read through the old thread.

And, yeah, I don't expect you to be unbiased or anything. Just clarifying. I linked to a post, and anyone can follow the thread from there. I would never knowingly attribute a position to anyone that they don't hold, and I worked damned hard to get a position out of DS, and it was what I said.

Do your own homework..

You made a claim, find these quotes.

 

[Jack V Savage]

If by substance you mean lying and misquoting people intentionally?

Yea I ignored that nonsense

Well, that didn't happen, but I mean you ducked the points. Specifically, I was commenting on the resemblance between campus douchebags that have you guys so up in arms and DS's own position here.

Do your own homework..

You made a claim, find these quotes.

I found quotes, and posted them. My point was made. If one wants to investigate further (and of course if you're a man of honor and you're going to accuse someone of lying, and you reject the evidence that he was telling the truth, you will want to investigate further), I provided the means to do that (just click the arrow).

 

[Satur9]

"centuries, yo. And we’re done watching, and waiting while this invention called whiteness uses and abuses us. Burying black people out of sight and out of mind, while extracting our culture, our dollars, our entertainment like oil — black gold. Ghettoizing and demeaning our creations then stealing them. Gentrifying our genius and then trying us on like costumes before discarding our bodies like rinds of strange fruit. The thing is, though, the thing is, that just because we’re magic doesn’t mean we’re not real. Thank you.”

How does this even make sense? Black culture and entertainment or "costumes" as he calls it is marketed to white folk...

And what does he mean by" discarding our bodies"

Remember, it's only ok if it is your side doing the taking. This shit never changes, they just replace the victims.

 

[scoopj]

Bullshit on both counts. I didn't slander DS or attribute a position to him that he didn't adopt. Read through the old thread.

And, yeah, I don't expect you to be unbiased or anything. Just clarifying. I linked to a post, and anyone can follow the thread from there. I would never knowingly attribute a position to anyone that they don't hold, and I worked damned hard to get a position out of DS, and it was what I said.

Seems you quoted the relevant portions. If that's all there was, you're making something out of nothing.

 

[Social Distance Warrior]

Seems you quoted the relevant portions. If that's all there was, you're making something out of nothing.

Text book little bitch techniques by savage.

 

[Jack V Savage]

Seems you quoted the relevant portions. If that's all there was, you're making something out of nothing.

In that, I'm just responding to DS's character attack. He talked about Obama engaging in "divisive rhetoric about slavery," and when I asked what was divisive about it (given that the context was in talking about how much progress we've made as a country), he fell back to the fact that it was mentioned at all. Thus my point that mentioning slavery is considered divisive by him, regardless of context.

If there's any other possible interpretation of his position in that thread, what is it?

 

[Madmick]

Bullshit on both counts. I didn't slander DS or attribute a position to him that he didn't adopt. Read through the old thread.

And, yeah, I don't expect you to be unbiased or anything. Just clarifying. I linked to a post, and anyone can follow the thread from there. I would never knowingly attribute a position to anyone that they don't hold, and I worked damned hard to get a position out of DS, and it was what I said.

No, you asserted this:

DS in particular seems to have a real issue there. In another thread, he was arguing that any mention of slavery, regardless of context, was divisive and should not be done.

This was not substantiated. Underlined the key word, here.

 

[Jack V Savage]

No, you asserted this:

This was not substantiated. Underlined the key word, here.

That's correct.

When I asked what was the problem with the specific mention, he didn't have an answer. His point was just that she shouldn't have mentioned it at all.

Again, if there's an alternate interpretation, what is it?

 

[Madmick]

In that, I'm just responding to DS's character attack. He talked about Obama engaging in "divisive rhetoric about slavery," and when I asked what was divisive about it (given that the context was in talking about how much progress we've made as a country), he fell back to the fact that it was mentioned at all. Thus my point that mentioning slavery is considered divisive by him, regardless of context.

If there's any other possible interpretation of his position in that thread, what is it?

That slavery is divisive within that specific context: Michelle Obama bringing it up in some White House speech.

Do you understand the value of the word, "Any"? Or do I need to educate you on this matter, too?

 

[panamaican]

Trump preaches the same divisiveness and his supporters champion it as an underlying message of "empowerment" when he starts talking about how the immigrants are "rapists, thieves, and some, I'm sure, are good people." You're just another storm trooper who perceives his race as a uniform, Pan. You lose all mental faculty when it comes to this.

Hardly. But please explain to me how I see my race as a uniform? And I still don't see the parallel with Trump. Trump is telling his audience that he will fix their problems. Jesse Williams is telling his audience to fix them themselves.

And you still haven't told me about my special brand of racism - Or is this you throwing around the "racist" label unthinkingly (just like those damn SJW's)?

You're goddamn right I didn't bat an eye. The world is one giant cesspool of inequality. I don't give a shit unless you can show that the system is-- as it is engineered in the present-- designed to oppress a specific group. It isn't. Black men shoot the lights out of everyone and then they whine they get into more violent confrontations with the cops. Hell, just the other day the death of that B-rate rapper from Baltimore was a story. I didn't know who he was, so I went to listen to his top song on YouTube. In the first 30sec I hear the lyrics, "If you don't like me, n***a, spray me." Apparently someone took him to heart. It was certainly a fine example of art imitating life imitating art.

Hmm, so all of black culture is boiled down to hip hop. Thanks for the insight.

As for the system being design in the present to oppress a specific group, you have to know better than to come with that superficial shit. From public education funding to the NHS to gerrymandering to the War on Drugs to the Southern Strategy which informed GOP politics for decades...all systems designed, in whole or in part, to oppress black America and are still on the books in the present.

You realize that the racial reasoning behind many of those laws didn't even become public knowledge until relatively recently, right? We didn't invalidate those laws. And some of the systems have become the bedrock of our current system.

Here's Jessie Williams full speech:

What data sheet is he looking at? Because we discovered that per capita relative to their criminally violent predispositions that blacks are actually less likely to be shot and killed by the police. The Washington Post has worked very hard to dismiss the philosophically sound nature of that context, but this is racist by virtue of not maintaining a just perspective. If you care about inequality in police violence against young black men, then you also have to care about the inequality in predisposition to violent crime committed by that latter group.

Of course you have to care about it...and then talk about it. Which includes both internal and external factors. Both of which are discussed regularly within the community...even if you don't pay attention to said discussions until they show up wherever it is you go to get current events while ignoring black websites, blogs, etc.

You want to comment on what the black community cares about but I'd bet good money you spend almost zero time actually looking into black sources for community information. Which is pretty close to a point that Jesse Williams made in his speech - I'm sure the relevance was lost on you though.

Sandra Bland is dead because she "acted free"? You're not better off as a black person in 2012 than 1612? Where exactly is the "bootstrap" speech, Pan? Point that shit out to me. All I see is a guy blaming the hell out of white people for African-American problems: "So what’s going to happen is we’re going to have equal rights and justice in our own country or we will restructure their function in ours". That is a direct reference to "white people" in the preceding sentence.

And the entire speech is directed to black people. Who do you think he's talking to?

Where is the messaging that I'm referring to but you seem oblivious to?

Now, this is also in particular for the black women in particular who have spent their lifetimes dedicated to nurturing everyone before themselves. We can and will do better for you.

The more we learn about who we are and how we got here, the more we will mobilize.

Now, the thing is, though, all of us in here getting money that alone isn’t going to stop this. All right? Now dedicating our lives to getting money just to give it right back. To put someone’s brand on our body when we spent centuries praying with brands on our bodies and now we pray to get paid with brands for our bodies. There has been no war that we have not fought and died on the front lines of. There has been no job we haven’t done. There’s no tax they haven’t levied against us. And we pay all of them.

Now, freedom is always coming in the hereafter but, you know what, though, the hereafter is a hustle. We want it now.

And we’re done watching, and waiting while this invention called whiteness uses and abuses us. Burying black people out of sight and out of mind, while extracting our culture, our dollars, our entertainment like oil — black gold. Ghettoizing and demeaning our creations then stealing them.

This is a deep, deep Christmas stocking. I'll be more than happy to force-feed you dicks out of it one by one all day so long as you continue to defend this despicable, divisive, supremacist hate speech.

Please try. That you are tone deaf to the message he was communicating doesn't mean it wasn't communicated to those who understand. The message was for his audience. I can go over it line for line if you really want the insight though.

That you aren't part of that audience but are fixated on the one reference to "whiteness" within it is a pretty clear demonstration of a victimhood mentality.

And once again: My special brand of racism please?

 

[Steve-French]

Fuck this guy. I have a hard time taking somebody like this seriously. He wants to bitch about white privilege while he has a white mother, raised in a Nuclear family, grew up going to private school, and graduated from a college that costs $41,000 dollars a semester to attend.

He has a double major in... African American Studies and Film and Media Arts.

 

[Jack V Savage]

That slavery is divisive within that specific context: Michelle Obama bringing it up in some White House speech.

Do you understand the value of the word, "Any"? Or do I need to educate you on this matter, too?

It was a graduation speech, and again, he didn't have a contextual basis for his objection. He wasn't objecting to the substance of her point or what she was saying about slavery; he was objecting to the fact that she used a reference to slavery to make it.

 

[scoopj]

In that, I'm just responding to DS's character attack. He talked about Obama engaging in "divisive rhetoric about slavery," and when I asked what was divisive about it (given that the context was in talking about how much progress we've made as a country), he fell back to the fact that it was mentioned at all. Thus my point that mentioning slavery is considered divisive by him, regardless of context.

If there's any other possible interpretation of his position in that thread, what is it?

Link it.