All Activity

You are much too subjective. It's always about you and your compulsion to be omniscient, and ultimately omnipotent. You obviously want to solve all the problems of the world. Good luck with that goal.

I prefer the dictionary definition of the word "perfect" which you might want to check out. And I assure you that watching old reels of Walter Payton in action will not lift my spirits about yesterday's loss.

@aka Contrarian perfect comes from the latin per- meaning totally, ala perview is when something is viewed totally absent any part not viewed fect - means work. A total work has all in it. Perfect never suggest an absence. Problems are part of what makes the world whole, are part of the total world, absent problems the world can't be perfect, a total work. What you call ideal, a thing of an idea, in not perfect. It is the idea of a world without problems, that is not a perfect world, that is an ideal world, an imbalanced world. I have etymologically proven my position. I have always opposed the USA heritage derived from the english of using words figuratively. It weakens all words. We do like each other, as much as near total strangers can. We do not concur on definition. if you have a video collage of sweetness running about, give it a view and lift your spirits

@aka Contrarian Assumptions are worthless, comprehension has value and if I don't comprehend someone else I ask them, beginning with I don't know, which is wisdom. Comprehension has nothing to do with justification, a thing of justice, meaning a thing determining right or wrong. I am not thinking in terms of right or wrong. I am not asking questions of you to be right or wrong, but to comprehend. Now you may not want me to comprehend you or may think another comprehending you is unimportant, but I don't live like that so I ask, with no demands of an answer. But I will continue to ask anyone to comprehend more. all of this is under an idea, maybe, the discourse in this post is about how black people relay to each other, and it is proof, at the least, that black people in 2026 have a lot we don't comprehend about each other and more importantly, the lack of comprehension makes collective action inevitably faulty.

@richardmurrayJust go with your assumptions. Why do I have to justify my sentiments to you? All of this is hypothetical.

In a perfect world, as the adjective "perfect" suggests, there are no problems. Life is ideal. You are free to challenge that definition, but you can't prove otherwise. So, we have to agree to disagree. I am in the throes of disappointment over the CHICAGO BEARS, my favorite football team, losing a game they could've won, but for the coach calling questionable plays and the receivers either missing their assignments or dropping the passes from my "adopted" baby boy, Quarterback Caleb Williams, so I don't feel like plowing through a maze of verbiage to further debate the implications of a perfect world. I'm mentally exhausted.🫩

@aka Contrarian no, right or wrong is not knowable in this issue, but maybe functionality is. Functionality defined as the quality of results. Does thinking a perfect world mean all is good get more positive results than thinking a perfect world includes all things? Does thinking a perfect world is an unattainable environment which humans have to embrace get more positive results than defining the perfect world as the world that is absent human involvement, which imperfects the world?

@aka Contrarian I am not trying to change your mind , I am trying to comprehend from your point of view where militancy ends or begins with black people in the usa. I assume, but you haven't been exact, that a black person in the usa is militant anytime they have any action, verbal or non verbal that is aggressive, regardless of situation. If I comprehend you correctly, then Sean Bell's father is militant for speaking ill to those who murdered his son. Protestors who throw bottles in reaction to being hosed or shot at are militant. I comprehend fully that Malcolm is militant from your point of view based on how i assume you define militancy, but based on your definition, I assume, you categorize many black people as militant. I don't view malcolm,sean bell's father, protestors reacting to violent attack as militant. To me, self defense does not suggest militancy. Self defense isn't nonviolent, but it isn't militant, to me. But I want to comprehend your thinking better. As for the first question, and I speak to @ProfD I wish I knew with the population of descended of enslaved in the past or today how many in our homes have or have not schismed on the relationship on how to relate to whites, before the usa or after the usa, as the usa doesn't really matter in this issue. This issue is really about the white colonialist and their descendants and the black enslaved and their descendants. I wish I knew. IT would be very revealing. Cause, even if it is 40% or 30% that is a lot. Maybe it is 5% , tiny. I wonder when 1865 hit how was it? and it yields another question in my mind, why doesn't this question come up more? Every single black person knows personally, offline a spectrum of black people who relate differently to whites. Black comedians have a whole mountain of jokes on this topic. So why is it, black churches, black organizations, rarely speak on this? it isn't a secret. I have many questions and no way to get answers. The second question is in series to the first. I wish I knew the truth. I guess more so , you guys guess less, but what is the truth? No one will know sadly, unless someone has a time machine and a huge ledger. And of course, the problem is in the wording, what defines a schism in the home? what defines criminalization or unwritten illegalization? the details or definitions even with the same information can provide various results... I don't know. I wish I knew , cause it matters. I argue how black people relate to white people in the usa , in black peoples own communal sphere, is a big thing. And shouldn't be some private issue or some shrugged issue because it is really an all black affair. Hell, even Tyler perry has mentioned this issue a lot in his work. As to the third, at least on the issue of faith to rule of law versus function based on black history, a schism exist between you, aka contrarian and profd as members of aalbc And for me, the issue isn't about right or wrong but how important these stances are in the larger scheme of things. Black people who believe in faith in the rule of law, are willing to be harmed and abused by whites, rather than break the law. That is a big stance in our populace, arguably globally. Cause black people globally are abused by non blacks. so black people anywhere in humanity who are willing to be abused rather than break the law, can never relate to white people the same way as black people who function for self defense or revenge or vendetta [three different things but all are violent] based on black history . And as you both know I think of what to do tomorrow? I don't know how to bridge that issue. I never forget telling a friend of mine. If I was a pastor of a church and a white man entered the church I manage, I would told that white man to leave immediately, and go to st patricks church down the street, this is a black church. in the usa, White people historically or modernly can not be trusted intermingling with blacks. whites will 99% of the time harm blacks. the quantity of events where whites harmed blacks proves this more than anything. Not 100% no, not 100% but 99% yeah. Look at black towns today, black farms today, black regions in white cities today? No, do whites kill blacks and brand blacks today? no, but harm still? many times yes. Obama sang amazing grace for that church that white man murdered people in. And while I know that church is open to all phenotypes, that nonviolent openness as closing based on phenotype is a form of violence based on how nonviolence is implemented by many, that nonviolent position is what got black people killed. and, the law will not heal that, the law didn't protect those people. So how can a movement exist among black people in the usa, holistically in populace, with such a divide of way of life? I argue near impossible. The usa is full of white peoples, white people [white europeans/white asians/white latinos/white muslims/white women/white jews combined are the majority] compared to blacks. so, any plan has to consider how white people fit. and ...

Right. Medications have been available for several decades to manage and prevent both HIV and AIDS. Of course, if the drugs are not available in a country, that presents different challenges to the people.

Men too

First of all, nothing you said changed my mind about referring to Malcom as "militant". In fact, you just provided a lot of reasons to justify his being militant, a perfectly good word which you apparently consider a stigma. As for your other questions. I agree with ProfD on the first two and disagree with him on the 3rd.

I am happy AALBC is still in existence. I need to test the calendar export and see what is actually exported as some of my calendar post are quite large. And I was wrong active membership didn't double by 2026. I have to do better.

We have no way of knowing which one of us is right. Do we?

Did William the Conqueror make England and thus Britian and thus the USA and the anglophone? Was William the Conqueror's lasting legacy in each country in the modern anglophone, dysfunctional media hiding the most sinful violent actions?

Poetry fans! Cento series episode 87 enjoy the poetry

@aka Contrarian I oppose that thinking , the word is perfect, a complete work, ompletion doesn't occur when all is good, that is imbalance. negativity must be part of anything for it to be truly perfect. life is even, it is human beings who are not even. It is human beings that make living uneven plus inequal. it isn't nature or other lifeforms. Nature promises balance. Humans beings imbalance.

@Pioneer1 your, not our, me and mine are not part of the our you speak of. Militaristically, the reality is present, a weak country, absent a decent military, is too far away to be bullied properly, while it has vast resources at its doorstep... no. whomever those some maybe, are completely wrong It is the same reason far east asia has the least militaristic presence of western europe, distance. distance is a powerful thing, and worth alot when you can't beat a bully and not us, you or yours canada nor mexico are not hard to explain. but the quick version is canada 's natural environment is much harsher than the usa for the technology of either countries nascence. Mexico like all of latin america [ haiti/brazil/columbia/or similar lke french canada which would become canada and the midwest states of the usa] was not viewed by the latin european empires [ france/spain/portugal] as anything but natural resource extractors. But the english viewed anglo america[ usa/jamaica] as places for profit + immigration, to dump their religious fanatics/criminals/illegal actors/general fiscal poor like fidel did with csimilar cubans and the florida exodus. So the usa grew a populace that was legally tied to the european center, unlike latin america where the white male warrior populace made the mulatto/mestizo / enslaved the black to operate the system of extraction. That is why the most profitable regions at the time were haiti/the spanish dominion from modern day canada to argentina. LAtin America was really a set of prison camps, just enough guards to maintain the money. Ship the money to europe. The usa wasn't the wealthiest zone in the americas financially. this is part of why england tried so many tax schemes and et cetera. So canada or mexico had a different origin in key ways financially but also militaristically. and not we, you or yours, not me or mine. not us, you and yours. I am nt and have never been statian and said it way too many times to require repeating. Well, I know that at the end of the commonly called world war two, the usa couldn't continue the war for overreach and the usa + ussr wanted to continue warring on the battlefield... but they simply couldn't and neither was willing to give up their militaristic advantage to the likes of western europe/japan who were completely annihilated , or the dominions of the former western european empires that had been intentionally run dysfunctionally. Because in the usa's case it is just luck, fate. the usa didn't even know how to wage a sea war. if the french didn't get involved in the war against the british empire, I am 100% certain the usa doesn't exist today as it is. history is 100% changed. France won that war. But that wasn't because the usa was smart, it was because france and england were in a centuries old blood feud. I will make the historical argument said blod feud lasted from the time of the viking's coming down at the end of the roman empire centered at old rome, till the end of commonly called world war 2. that is thousands of years. But they are neighbors, always similar in power, so any war between them will always be a war of equals which means real bloody and that kind of blood transcends marketplaces. They had 100 years war with each other, that isn't a joke. Vendetta's are real in humanity. Quite a number of them exists throughout humanity. The serbs and croats were fighting before the soviet union, during the soviet and after the soviet union. I bet if japan had an viable military and invaded the korean peninsula, all koreans would unite real quick, the only thing all koreans still know is to hate the japanese. hell, Black people enslaved in north america have a blood feud with whites, it predated the usa, exists still now during the usa and knowing vendettas will exist after the usa, cause, blood feuds aren't about money. yes, fiscally greedy people involve themselves, but the energy fueling it, like the hatfields and mccoys in the appalachias is old wounds that money nor time can heal. the healing can only come from the hearts. but both hearts have to be willing. The zionists and palestineans are a blood feud. the ira was only 300 people but the blood feud between the irish and english, which still has many adherents on either side,, was so strong, those 300 used more explosives than the usa in vietnam. So I said all of this to make it clear, don't underestimate the power of a blood feud and how it can influence history. saved the usa. France and england were so used to being at war, it became natural. Well, you have presented your fiscal position:) thank you. this is the economic corner.I comprehend your stance though it warrants discourse. either or both depending on who you ask. Remember the usa has always had multiple financial positions. Some black or non black have always believed in private ownership leading the way, thus private hospitals, the logic being people will figure out a way to afford a hospital or move. Some black or non black have always believed municipal activity, the government enganging in services to the public, the logic being it represents positive graces among humans, regardless of the cost or tax burden. Some black or non black try to find a bridge between both Some black or non black are anarchist who don't want either. So whose fault? I don't know. It all depends on point of view. But why should ne point of view be correct or wrong? one point of view has always been implemented from whomever is in power. how do I feel about currency? I try to stay away from that kind of discourse in the economic corner, feelings lead to rubbish in financial discourse for me. But as I try to answer every question, I will provide an answer, which I have said before. All ideas are effective based on implementation. To reword, currency is merely an idea, if implemented a certain way to a certain place or time it will succeed . If implemented other ways it will fail. but that is with all ideas. socialism/monarchy/vendetta... implementation is always the key, not right or wrong. And luck can be the key to implementation, not any human planning.

Are you enjoying the time of the Trump presidency , second term?

Not sure of how this thread became about Iran not siding with Black nations. Of course, those Persians (Aryans) and sand n8gglets in general have zero respect for Black folks who they feel bent a knee to imperialism a long time ago.

Black folks have been straightening and dyeing their hair and wearing cosmetics for many decades. Before Malcolm X underwent his transformation he was "running around putting chemicals in his hair". These younger folks may be choosing more extreme hair dye colors and forms of self-expression but there's nothing new under the sun. That includes older generation making observations of and/or complaining about younger generation.

I do not believe passive resistance has broken up many black clans/homes. I do not criminalize or criticize Black folks who do not adhere to non-violence and/or passive resisitance. I.do not believe Black folks should have faith in the rule of law to protect us especially from the acts of white racists and their agents. While I understand why Black folks have resorted to non-violence and passive resisitance, I do not believe it has been nor will it ever be an effective tactic in dealing with the enemy that is racism white supremacy. Personally, I totally side with Sean Bell's father. IOW, I'm not an advocate of non-violent and passive resisitance. I believe Black folks should be proficient in using weapons and self-defense. We should have a special forces unit as well. As I've mentioned before, on a public forum that's my polite way of expressing such beliefs as it relates to dealing with non-Black folks who disrespect and violate FBA/AfroAmericans.

richardmurray globally recognized? not everyone views Mensa like that? humanity is quite large you know. disability does not make one dumb and to education... i argue education is rarely designed functionally, anywhere in humanity. Global doesn't necessarily mean everyone ON the globe...lol....but people AROUND the globe. so you believe in smarter and neutral, not smarter or dumber... ok Don't over complicate it...lol. -There are no dumb nations -Some nations are smarter than others two big oceans border the country, That factor could have been just as easily worked AGAINST our favor as IN our favor. Some would have seen this as geographical isolation from the rest of the world...especially the Eastern Hemisphere. But intelligence didn't let this stop us. neighbors who have always been impotent or at least not able to strike hard, and only two by land. If they were/are impotent...why? They are nations made up of human beings just like the United States. So why would we be so much powerful unless it's due to intelligence? a financial history, including the white european colonial, where inequal or uneven financial system allowed for the production of weapons at larger quantities than most, not quality , but quantity. For me, nazi germany or soviet russia built better weapons by a mile than the usa, but no one produces more than our friendly neighborhood white slaver. I'm not sure if you're correct about the weaponry of Germany or Russia. But the fact is both of those nations....unlike the United States...were lacking a sizable Black population. The Black population of the United States is one of the key features that make us a global power because it's the source of our superior entertainment that's marketed and envied across the globe. No weapon the usa has is exclusive to the usa, but usa has more of them. But none of the usa military rivals had enslavement like the usa. russia was an empire and cossacks and checyens were abused but they weren't enslaved like blacks to whites in the usa. The soviet union has a pro european bias in its populace, a heritage from the czars, but russia has been battling all of its life it has never been far from a rival. China has never been far from a rival, and its neighbors have at times been far more powerful. so the usa has fortune on its side, most empires do. IT isn't smarts or intelligence. Perhaps the superior intelligence OF the United States above other nations (a fact that you insist on denying) is part of that fortune! hmmm, the heritage of the usa is private care, ala fiscal capitalism, if you can pay for a doctor you have one. public hospitals heritage in the usa is from pro bono work, not for profit. They're CALLED private hospitals but they're not really private. They're actually corporately owned hospitals for the public. Corporate is what I like to call "semi-private". Because it's often controlled and regulated by the government but not completely owned by it nor does one person or family own it but usually a huge market of shareholders.....it doesn't fall squarely into the government, public OR private slots. no, nyc has been underserved by hospitals for its entire history Is this the fault of the private hospitals, or the fault of the government for not building hospitals of it's own to compete with the private ones insuring consistent progress and low costs, as well as cater to the needs of the people? universal income will not delete currency, if I said I feel it will , I apologize, that wasn't my intent. I said: This society is far too complex to operate without currency. Your response was: I think a solution exists that I have never seen tried, so it can't be proven. But, I don't think so. I took that to mean that you thought operating with currency was a problem that needed a solution. You just said that universal income will not delete currency. However how do you feel ABOUT currency and the use of currency in society?

ProfD Coco is a young adult having fun in her profession and taking it to the bank. I do not believe she's self-hating or insecure in her own beauty. She's living her best life. Have you noticed that for the past 10 years or so, what many young Black women call "fun" and looking their "best" involves dying their hair blonde? Going to bars, getting drunk, flirting with White men...even if they don't really find them attractive...and dying their hair blonde. Even when they're trying to be professional and serious, they think "blonde" hair is the way to go: Basically imitating...or TRYING to imitate...middle class White women. The Honorable Elijah Muhammad said: Accept your own and be yourself That has a lot of meanings, however one of them is be the best version of YOU. Don't try to improve yourself by trying to be someone else. When we did that as AfroAmericans back in the late 60s and 70s...we were the envy of the world. White people were getting perms and afros nappying their hair up trying to look like US.

ProfD Regardless (richardmurray said "gardless"....lol) of that, the fact is most Persians consider themselves "Aryan" (Iran) by race and tend to be quite racist. They'll side with the U.S. and Israel before siding with any Black nation...lol.

I think this is a trick question.....lol