White? Dont teach here. Op Updated to address false 'racist' labal

[dank69]

whaT? bwhahahahaha

ok how you got that out of what i wrote.

exactly. so i guess they should fire every black history teacher (except for African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies).


I didn't know that the color of your skin dictated what history you could teach! Thanks karen!

Why should black people only be able to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies?

 

[SpatiallyAware]

whaT? bwhahahahaha



ok how you got that out of what i wrote.

This is what happens when modern progressives spend every waking moment trying to find a place to stick their 'racist' labels.

 

[realibrad]

You modern progressives use the terms black and white not to define skin color, but to divide us culturally.

My opinion is that we shouldn't be dividing these lines between ourselves. We are all the same, and should treat each other equally rather than look for excuses to ask for special treatment.


You and the rest of the race brigaiders constantly look for ways to divide people - trying to figure out what makes us different, and how you can profit or take advantage of the perceived differences. You all use the terms "white" and "black" as a way to define cultures, which I think is a shame and incredibly racist. Medium ivory people can follow "black" culture. Burnt umber people can follow "white" cultures. We don't live in an era divided between "blacks" and "whites" (even though that's what you modern progressives want)


Skin color is a non-factor in regards to culture. I refuse to use the divisive terms of black and white, I think it's ridiculous and out of place in our post-cosby society.



To me, the only difference is physical. So it makes more sense to call it like it is, which is an actual skin color. Nobody is physically black nor white. Burnt umber and medium ivory are far more accurate terms.

Started out O.K. but then got weird.

People use terms such as black to describe a wide range of things, culture being one of them. So while people may not always conform to "Black" its often correct enough to use it as a term.

Here is a quick break down.
Race started in a belief that different people were less more evolved. "Blacks" being the least evolved.

The terms later became intermixed with culture and other factors. Race was no longer just about evolution state.

We now know that evolution does not work that way, and each "Race" may have different traits, but none are more or less evolved.

Race has its roots in evolution, and your use of racism is based off an idea of under-evolved humans. Suggesting the use of another term or word to replace "Black" wont matter. You have a problem with the connotation and not the word and or words. Changing out the word does nothing to change connotation.

 

[realibrad]

Why should black people only be able to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies?

So waggy is saying that the white teacher should be allowed to teach culture's history.

It seems like you are saying that other races should be able to teach other race's history.

Are you guys in agreement or not?

 

[waggy]

Why should black people only be able to teach African-American, Latino and Southeast Asian studies?

that is called sarcasm. but i think you know that but just trolling by calling people racist. Then again it could just be you are a fucking idiot.

 

[dank69]

So waggy is saying that the white teacher should be allowed to teach culture's history.

It seems like you are saying that other races should be able to teach other race's history.

Are you guys in agreement or not?

No. Waggy said that black people are not qualified to teach any other history if we follow the original train of thought that white people can't teach African History. Therefore, Waggy believes black people are not part of American History in the same way that the protesters don't think white people are a part of African History.

that is called sarcasm. but i think you know that but just trolling by calling people racist. Then again it could just be you are a fucking idiot.

Read what you originally said again.

 

[dphantom]

that is called sarcasm. but i think you know that but just trolling by calling people racist. Then again it could just be you are a fucking idiot.

I am leaning toward the latter.

 

[dank69]

I am leaning toward the latter.

That's because you don't know how to think.

 

[realibrad]

No. Waggy said that black people are not qualified to teach any other history if we follow the original train of thought that white people can't teach African History. Therefore, Waggy believes black people are not part of American History in the same way that the protesters don't think white people are a part of African History.

Read what you originally said again.

He first said this though...

i agree. this "news" is silly. the school should tell them go pound sand. The teacher has the qualifications so he is able to teach it. it amazes me that people think the color of the skin matters.

The comment you read was sarcasm. Lol I think you both agree, but you dont realize it.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

That's because you don't know how to think.

...and you don't know how to read.

 

[Pray To Jesus]

How is the use of "They" racist here? The people who are requesting that the school hire someone else, is based completely off of someones race, and not their talents.

They seems to be the correct word for the people who make up the group that has the issue.

He said blacks and Hispanics complain. Therefore, they refers to Black Americans and Hispanics.

 

[dank69]

He first said this though...



The comment you read was sarcasm. Lol I think you both agree, but you dont realize it.

It doesn't matter if it was sarcasm. I know it was sarcasm. The point is that for his comparison to be valid he has to think that black people are not a part of American History. This isn't rocket science. I'm not arguing with him about anything. I am just explaining what he actually thinks because he, and many others here apparently, are too stupid to understand it.

 

[dank69]

...and you don't know how to read.

Oh look, another one who doesn't understand what he is reading.

 

[realibrad]

He said blacks and Hispanics complain. Therefore, they refers to Black Americans and Hispanics.

Which in this case is empirically the case here, as the people complaining are from that group.

"What we wanted was this new curriculum and for someone of our descent to teach this class,” said community advocate Rev. Karen Crozier.

"She said they had an African-American candidate, but the white candidate had a master's degree, and so in their mind, that made him more qualified for this particular position,” said Rev. Crozier.

 

[realibrad]

It doesn't matter if it was sarcasm. I know it was sarcasm. The point is that for his comparison to be valid he has to think that black people are not a part of American History. This isn't rocket science. I'm not arguing with him about anything. I am just explaining what he actually thinks because he, and many others here apparently, are too stupid to understand it.

From what I read, he thinks that its wrong to say that only the race of the topic can teach the class. Where did you get the part about him not thinking blacks are not apart of American history?

He said he wants teachers who are qualified to teach classes, and race should not be a qualification.

You said the same thing, so I'm just not sure where the disagreement is.

 

[Whiskey16]

Which in this case is empirically the case here, as the people complaining are from that group.

Yes, and the OP explicitly used this story to call for such groups of people to " go back to where they came from" as they are so un-American for daring a desire to have courses concerning such history.

Xenophobic and supremacist racism found.

 

[himkhan]

A story about blacks? Check

Usual regressive "suspect" logged into Spatial account to espouse overt racism. Check.

Popcorn popped, lawn chair out for the "burnt umber" troll show...

 

[Zaap]

Oh look, another one who doesn't understand what he is reading.

It's just embarrassing, dude. Quit while you're this far behind.

 

[waggy]

It doesn't matter if it was sarcasm. I know it was sarcasm. The point is that for his comparison to be valid he has to think that black people are not a part of American History. This isn't rocket science. I'm not arguing with him about anything. I am just explaining what he actually thinks because he, and many others here apparently, are too stupid to understand it.

good god. you are a fucking idiot.

No i do not mean that only blacks can teach that

I am saying it fucking does not matter if you are white, IF you have the education you can teach the class they are bitching about. IF you are black and have the education you can teach whatever class.

Saying a white or black can't teach ANY class based on color is silly.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Oh look, another one who doesn't understand what he is reading.

If you weren't such an arrogant asshole all the time, I'd be embarrassed for you.

 

[nehalem256]

It doesn't matter if it was sarcasm. I know it was sarcasm. The point is that for his comparison to be valid he has to think that black people are not a part of American History. This isn't rocket science. I'm not arguing with him about anything. I am just explaining what he actually thinks because he, and many others here apparently, are too stupid to understand it.

Actually that would seem to be the logic behind having special African-American History classes...

 

[dank69]

From what I read, he thinks that its wrong to say that only the race of the topic can teach the class. Where did you get the part about him not thinking blacks are not apart of American history?

He said he wants teachers who are qualified to teach classes, and race should not be a qualification.

You said the same thing, so I'm just not sure where the disagreement is.

The key is right in your own post right above this one. Protesters want someone of "our descent."

Protester argument:
Premise 1: Teacher should be of correct descent
Premise 2: Current teacher is not of correct descent
Conclusion: Current teacher is not acceptable

Waggy's reductio ad absurdum argument:
Premise 1: Protester logic also leads to the conclusion that black people can only teach African American studies
Premise 2: This 2nd conclusion is stupid.
Conclusion: Therefore the protester's conclusion is also stupid.

My analysis of his comparison:
Premise 1: Conclusion 1 is based on the link that the current teacher is not of the correct descent.
Premise 2: For Waggy's extension to follow the same pattern and be a valid reductio ad absurdum, the 2nd premise that leads to the conclusion in his Premise 1 MUST BE that black people are not of the correct descent to teach anything other than African History
Conclusion: Waggy does not think black people are of the correct descent to teach American History.

For clarity I will expand Waggy's full logic train:
Premise 1: If proper descent is a requirement for teaching African studies it is a requirement for teaching all history classes.
Premise 2: ???
Conclusion 1: Black people do not meet the requirement to teach anything but African studies

Waggy's reductio ad absurdum argument:
Premise 1: Following Conclusion 1, protester logic also leads to the conclusion that black people can only teach African American studies
Premise 2: This 2nd conclusion is stupid.
Conclusion: Therefore the protester's conclusion is also stupid.

Go ahead and fill in something for the ??? part that doesn't equal "black people are not the correct descent to teach American History"

 

[SpatiallyAware]

You are the only person here who is having trouble with this.

 

[dank69]

You are the only person here who is having trouble with this.

My logic is AIRTIGHT. A large majority of P&N have no idea how to use basic logic.

 

[dphantom]

you didn't stop while you were far behind.....