Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    It does reinforce that history but it's not really possible to just get rid of that culture now. Whatever the culture's roots, it is firmly engrained and it's not possible to change overnight, nor should people be forced to. The idea of 'Black History Month' is merely to remember past mistakes and celebrate the advances we have made, and though for some it may promote ill feeling, if we were to stop recognising 'black' culture and history because of its roots then that would only be another form of exclusionism. Should we not have a Holocaust Memorial Day or commemorate the anniversary of the end of the World Wars? They are all terrible events but are there to remind future generations of the discrimination and conflict of the past and to show that society has attempted to move on.
    I'm not saying we should stop recognising it...im just saying we should stop prodding it like you would a soor ulcer. The sub culture maybe firmly engrained, but it doesn't mean that it should be encouraged. 'Cultural' or not, there's no reason why a society which is largely for black people should be any more acceptable than a society targeted at White people.

    The reason for why we commemorate the end of the world wars is obvious. Many British people, fathers and grandfathers of people alive today, died on the battlefield during those conflicts. They're also useful because they look back to a time when the whole country (along with people from many other cultures and faiths) were united as a whole. The reason for black history month, on the otherhand, seems to be to look back to a time when society was divided. I suppose on one hand it is arguable that it does show how far we've come, but on the otherhand wouldn't it be better to just let it go? Although as a historian i'd argue that all history is valid and deserves to be valued and researched, I can't see any legitimate reason for showcasing Black History. Especially since people in Britain are so ignorant of their own country' history.

    Like Auscwitz- the constant reminders of the past mean we, each new generation- learn from the past. Why do they teach British history in schools? Black history isn't just about slavery. Think of it as a curriculum, in much the same way that British history is taught in school. Only once a year instead of all year round.
    It doesn't though - Neo-Nazism is just as alive as it ever was. All you get is a number of ordinary respectable people, who probably would never consider commiting anything on the lines of the Holocaust, being irritated by the constant browbeating.

    *******s, if british history was actually taught, i'd have no problem with it. If we had a Black history month, a catholic history month, anArabic history month, a Chinese history month etcetc I wouldn't have a problem with it. However, it seems silly trying to teach wider history when people are generally so ignorant of our own.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Please refer me to evidence as to when white people were denied access to civil rights and treated as inferior because of their skin colour in Britain or America.
    Have you honestly never heard of "No blacks, No Irish, No dogs"?

    If you think there has been no white oppression then you have lived a very shallow live.

    http://www.channel4.com/life/microsi...jim_pines.html

    http://homepage.eircom.net/~calypso/refugee/immig2.html

    Just as there is a huge number of blacks who have never been oppressed there has also been a very large number of whites who have been.

    This is not just confined to Britain and America.

    Do we need to bring slavery into this too?

    Oppression is not about race, it can happen in any combination, mono-racially, intra-racially, or with one race oppressing another.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paul Bedford)
    Have you honestly never heard of "No blacks, No Irish, No dogs"?

    If you think there has been no white oppression then you have lived a very shallow live.

    http://www.channel4.com/life/microsi...jim_pines.html

    http://homepage.eircom.net/~calypso/refugee/immig2.html

    Just as there is a huge number of blacks who have never been oppressed there has also been a very large number of whites who have been.

    This is not just confined to Britain and America.

    Do we need to bring slavery into this too?

    Oppression is not about race, it can happen in any combination, mono-racially, intra-racially, or with one race oppressing another.
    Dear god what on earth...:rolleyes:

    This is the most frustrating post I have ever encountered. Firstly all the first example does is re-inforce my point. I can only assume that you're using Irish as an example of white oppression because otherwise you're supporting my argument. As I have repeatedly stated of course oppression can occur on grounds other than race. Blacks in America were supressed because of their race: fact. Read your first link. It is irrespective of other forms of oppression, it is simply the case. The Irish were discriminated against because they were Irish, not because they were white. I mean come on, how much can you distort my posts without just making them up?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    This is the most frustrating post I have ever encountered. Firstly all the first example does is re-inforce my point. I can only assume that you're using Irish as an example of white oppression because otherwise you're supporting my argument. As I have repeatedly stated of course oppression can occur on grounds other than race.
    Right, so it is not race specific, correct?

    Blacks in America were supressed because of their race: fact.
    Some blacks were, some were not.

    The Irish were discriminated against because they were Irish, not because they were white.
    But what race were they?

    Your argument was that black sub-culture was ok, because ALL blacks had been surpressed, and white subcultures were not ok, because NO whites had been surpressed.

    You can play with labels all you want, it doesn't change the facts.

    Were all blacks supressed?

    Were all whites supressed?

    Were some blacks supressed?

    Were some whites supressed?

    Why should blacks have rights that whites should not?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Blacks were suppressed because of their race.

    Whites were not supressed because of their race, but for other reasons. (And in America the comparison between oppression against blacks and any form of oppression against whites is just ridiculous).

    Simple enough for you? Your posts are totally convoluted and hysterical.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Blacks were suppressed because of their race.
    No, ALL blacks were not supressed.

    Whites were not supressed because of their race, but for other reasons. (And in America the comparison between oppression against blacks and any form of oppression against whites is just ridiculous).
    Why is it?

    Try telling that to the white worker whipped by the black master.

    Simple enough for you?
    It would be simpler if you answered the questions.

    You can play with labels all you want, it doesn't change the facts.

    Were all blacks supressed?

    Were all whites supressed?

    Were some blacks supressed?

    Were some whites supressed?

    Why should blacks have rights that whites should not?
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    To be honest, you're just denying obvious truths by smearing them with petty pedantics, so I won't carry on pandering to this nonsense.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    To be honest, you're just denying obvious truths by smearing them with petty pedantics, so I won't carry on pandering to this nonsense.
    No, I am stating facts, that you are running away from.

    Why can't you answer the questions?

    It's simple really, let me do it for you.

    Were all blacks supressed?

    No

    Were all whites supressed?

    No

    Were some blacks supressed?

    Yes

    Were some whites supressed?

    Yes

    Why should blacks have rights that whites should not?

    They shouldn't.

    Your argument about oppression does not stand up.

    Would have been simpler for you to just say it doesn't stand up.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Ok, so would you argue that whites have been suppressed to the same extent of blacks because of their race?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Paul Bedford)
    I know this might be stating the blindingly obvious, but has anyone stopped to consider trying it here, to see what would happen?

    I know this is not a university per se, but it is a forum populated by students, that does have societies.

    Why doesn't someone go and try and set up a white society, or a black society, for that matter, and see the reactions and feedbacks?

    It would perhaps be more conclusive than mere speculation.

    Most students' unions have rules preventing affliation of societies that are not open to all. That's where it differs fundamentally from TSR.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    I don't know about that. How many university religious societies are as welcoming to non-members of their respective faiths as are the TSR J-Soc, I-Soc and Christian Society?
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Ok, so would you argue that whites have been suppressed to the same extent of blacks because of their race?
    I would say there are more examples of blacks being opressed, than whites, in the countries so far mentioned, but that does not make it a racially exclusive thing, and offer one race a certain set of rights that another race should not have.

    I don't believe than the non-oppressed should get a free ride, because other people were oppressed, or that the oppressed should be forgotten because others were not oppressed.

    Therefore it is a non-racial thing, and not a valid reason to allow one race to have societies and forbid such rights to another race.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hah. Want to see something interesting? Go to http://www.google.com and type in "black culture" and you will notice 1,490,000 different sites with "black culture" listed in them. Now do the same for "white culture" and look how this pales in comparison - only 280,000 different websites containing the term "white culture". This is mere proof that white pride, culture, etc. is more taboo than black pride, culture, etc.

    (Original post by Laika)
    You have both misrepresented and misinterpreted the society. It is not a society there to celebrate being 'black' as such, it's there to represent cultures of certain natures, which as the website says, are underrepresented in the Union. This highlights two points, 1. That it's celebrating a culture, not a race, and 2. A 'White' society would be unnecassary because they don't need representation: they compose the majority of the student body!
    Are they really underrepresented, though? Does the white:non-white ratio not match the representation each race gets?

    By the way, I knew when I posted this link that it wasn't a celebration of "black culture", per-se.

    Instead people jump at the chance to offer immature and borderline racist comments like this with an attempt to highlight a double standard in the system.
    Hah! How was my post immature and borderline racist? Oh, god, please, you're white - no need to play the race card for black people. Jeez.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Laika)
    Ok, so would you argue that whites have been suppressed to the same extent of blacks because of their race?
    I think as a general point, it is important to note that there are only TWO relevant remaining effects of black oppression, or for that matter any oppression of a race:

    1. Racism
    2. Socio-economic situations.

    Racism is best combated by removing ALL favoritism for a particular race and all special treatment. Equality - it does exactly what is says on the tin.

    As to poverty - that is best addressed in a racially neutral way. This is why things like scholarships only for blacks are misguided, even if perfectly legal. The point is, (and one that hasn’t really been addressed) that in the US, to take an example, the level of tertiary education for blacks in the bottom socio-economic group, is very similar to that for whites. They are BOTH extremely low because poverty often means poor education, low standardised test scores, and a culture of under-achievement.

    The problem is poverty - not race... much of the disadvantages for blacks are down to racism, and economics rather than some alternative and lasting effect of oppression that has set them back.

    Racism is best addressed through legal penalties and anti-discrimination policies.

    Poverty is best addressed through means tested scholarships and perhaps weighting. Or even better - through stellar public education.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Atomik)
    Hah. Want to see something interesting? Go to http:www.google.com and type in "black culture" and you will notice 1,490,000 different sites with "black culture" listed in them. Now do the same for "white culture" and look how this pales in comparison - only 280,000 different websites containing the term "white culture". This is mere proof that white pride, culture, etc. is more taboo than black pride, culture, etc.
    his point though, will be that that is a reflection of the fact that white culture is a more meaningless concept.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by cottonmouth)
    You constantly, constantly, constantly take quotes out of context and misinterpret them to appear to strengthen your own.

    I said WESTERNISED WESTERNISED WESTERNISED WESTERNISED BLACK PEOPLE FROM AFRICA AND JAMAICA HAVE CULTURES THAT ARE MORE SIMILAR TO EACH OTHER THAN THE SIMILARITIES BETWEEN FRENCH ABD BRITISH CULTURE. I know that a bloody tribe in the dense African jungle wont have cultural similarities to a jamaican! Stop doing this, its irritating.
    The same can be said about Western whites, too, though, surely? :s
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Atomik)
    The same can be said about Western whites, too, though, surely? :s
    Apprently Afro-Caribbean British and Afro-Americans are significantly more similar in culture than white British and white americans.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Pfft!

    [email protected], though. The intelligent black person does not want to be labelled as a rap-listening thug! This is the sort of culture which holds black people down as a whole, and gives them a negative image.
    Offline

    12
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Atomik)
    [email protected], though. The intelligent black person does not want to be labelled as a rap-listening thug! This is the sort of culture which holds black people down as a whole, and gives them a negative image.
    Right out of Bill Cosby's quote book ... and HE was called racist and uncle Tom or saying it...

    I like rap as much as the next guy, but in the US at least, it provides a very good example about thr culture/race confusion. To many - attacking rap as a subversive and destructive influence is taken to be "racism"... nevermind the fact that it is masogonysitic, violent, and glorfies behaviour that most would agree is counter-productive to say the least.

    However racial sensitivities in the US have conflated Blackness in terms of ethnicity, with Black culture, so that to attack the latter is taken by many as an attack on the former.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    Hah. I love it when jealous in-the-gutter black people call successful blacks "Uncle Tom", "sell-outs" or "wannabe whitey".

    I once got racist for saying I thought rap was terrible. Mind you, I can't say I like much 'black' music, to be honest; not my thing. That doesn't make me a "omfg you rayscist" though.
 
 
 
Poll
Do you like carrot cake?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.