Pioneer1

I think this entire protest of the national anthem is creating more problems than it's worth. I defend the brothers' right to express themselves and not stand for the anthem if they choose but this does NOTHING to combat police brutality or racism. It's nothing more than a deflection and a waste of time. Tangibly speaking, what exactly are these players seeking to get out of this? Don't tell me about "rights" and "respect".....you can't eat that, buy a masion with that, or pass it down from one generation to the next. What the hell are they fighting and protesting for? If you want to boycott the NFL to get more money out of the owners or to wrestle power and control away from them and put it in the hands of AfroAmericans....I agree and support it. But just acting a fool and fighting rich White men who write your paycheck without clear goals and clear benefits is foolish...in my opinion. "Hey yall!! Let's come together, lock arms, and kneel on the field!!" Now what fool???? Did that publicity stunt stop that racist cop or citizen from shooting down an unarmed Black person???? If you have a problem with police brutality then go down to the police station where it occured and THAT will have more of an impact than throwing a temper tantrum on the football field like an overgrown child. A White man just got off for pulling out a gun and shooting a Black man to death over a parking space down in Florida. So what next, are Black folks going to lock arms and protest Disney World???? We need some REAL leadership today.

Del A defense mechanism is not a sign of strength. It's an internal weakness or insecurity. Exactly!! And by the way, my question has YET to be answered. 　 Chevdove It's true that many if not most Black men play a lot of games with women, however the reason is simple.....they want sex. Most AfroAmerican men I know don't play games with women to purposely ruin their lives, hurt them, or cause confusion....these are BY PRODUCTS of their pursuit of sex. The problem is in THIS society where the morals and rules of engagement have been set up by Caucasian men who are less focused on sex and more focused on violence and warfare....sex is pretty much either condemned or restricted to a very limited area with a limited amout of people. Trying to live and get along in a society that wasn't designed by or for AfroAmericans forces too many of us to act outside of our nature and it leads to pathological relationships. Cynique If you know the answer to the question, why ask it? I DON'T know the answer to the question.....lol. I know it's a defense mechanism but I don't understand exactly WHO are these women trying to defend themselves from and WHAT are they trying to defend themselves from. Clearly most of the men who end up passing the test have babies with them outside of wedlock, don't have jobs, and abuse them. So WHO are they defending and protecting themsevles from? Good men? Obvioulsy bad men are passing the test for most of these women. I don't see Asian women putting up a "defense mechanism" and they clearly have a higher incidence of positive relationships with men.

Not sure where Cynique is going with this thread but as far as having a "thick skin" on the internet.....it's a must. It's a shame so many children and young adults are commiting suicided because they feel they are being "bullied" online. Which pretty much means they're so weak-willed and desparate for the attention of social media that they can't resist the urge to stay online, even if it means being victimized.

I'm not sure if you got the clearest understanding of what I just said, but actually it's even colder than what you just described. From a business owners perspective whether or not your employees or subjects are receiving "better opportunities" is irrelevant. The only thing relevant is whether or not your'e getting rich or generating a profit. Now most owners will CLAIM to be concerned or PRETNED that they care about their workers, but I don't believe most do. So perhaps the slave owners tried to convince the SLAVES or those who witnessed the brutality of slavery from the outside that what they were doing were for the benefit of the slaves....but THEY THEMSELVES couldn't give a damn about their slaves or their benefit. The only thing that mattered was the money and work they could get out of them. As far as me...... I'm not fond of using other people's lables to describe myself or putting my ideaology in a box. In today's society there word "Capitalist" could mean a million different things. Everyone has their own definition for it. The same thing could be said for "Socialist". I believe in AfroAmerican controlled and influenced Free Enterprise were Black people are free to own and operate their businesses however they like as long as they aren't posing a danger to the community.

aren't you asking for proof in this statement? This reads to me as if you are asking for proof. What did I miss? I think you're mixing up two separate statements on two separate positions.... In the case of the above quote, I was talking about in the above quote was whether or not those in prison commit more crime than the general public. And I wasn't so much ASKING for proof as much as I was simply establishing my disagreement on the issue unless your provided proof. But if you see this as asking for proof, OK...I can' see how it could be interpreted as that. BUT....... A related but SEPARATE issue that I HAVE NOT asked for proof on is whether or not less educated people are more violent. THAT position was what I was refering too when I said I'm not asking for proof.

I know it's a defense mechanism, but I guess my question is how great is your defense if you STILL end up choosing the wrong men in your life despite your "tests". Most of the women I know who deploy this technique have a history of miserable relationships and have several children by several "baby daddies" who obviously passed whatever test they had for them at the time.

Is this what writters commonly call "satire"?

Troy If you were worth a few hundred billion of dollars could you live with yourself having the people who work for you making $9 an hour? Let me answer your question honestly...... Yes I could, as long as that was what they agreed to work for BUT- I wouldn't, because I would pay them more. I personally wouldn't mind taking a SLIGHT decrease in my profits to makes sure my workers are receiving a decent living wage. However if paying them MORE than $9 an hour means I won't make a profit at all....they'll only get $9 for the time being. The goal of most business owners isn't to be nice, or even to be fair, it's to get rich and accumulate wealth. When we understand this, we are no longer suprised or disappointed in why they do what they do.

Chevdove Glad to see you back! The information you're providing is so powerful and detailed, it reminds me of those giants they allegedly found in western China a while back. They were said to have blond hair and white skin. Are you suggesting that the particular giants that you're speaking off are descendants of what many Christian scholars refer to as "fallen angels" ???? Troy I agree that reading about a place AND visiting it would most likely be better than just flying over and visiting it with no direction or guidance; however the problem with ONLY reading about it is that you're getting SOMEONE ELSE'S opinion about a place from THEIR perspective. Everyone processes information differently and we know how other people see life and interpret their surroundings may not always line up with yours. I used to live down South and MY interpreration and opinion of the South is different from most of what I read about in books or online....especially articles and reports written by Caucasians. I was born and raised in Michigan. When I hear the word "Michigan" my understanding of the word and the images it brings will be entirely different than YOURS or someone else who knows far less about the state because of so much of the first hand knowledge I have of this place. If given a choice between the two....and it's safe to do,,,,,it's better to go and see for yourself because you're taking in far more sensory information that match up with YOUR senses and mindset so that you can interpret and process the information in YOUR way. Unless danger is involved, first hand direct knowledge is almost always better than second hand knowledge you're receiving from others. Even the courts don't see eye witness testimony as very credible because of the errors in human memory and perception.

I WOULD answer the question if I could figure it out....lol. Can you re-phrase it or break it down to where it's a little clearer? Del I've come to the conclusion that when you sweep aside all of the insults, projecting, and trying to get into our heads to figure out what REALLY mean or how we REALLY feel..... The fact is, I don't think Cynique even HAS a serious opinion on the subject of these corrections officers getting pregnant. And because of that....she is trying to divert attention from it.

Troy Pioneer why do you keep demanding proof. You have no proof and I've never said i have proof. I have presented a factual correlation. all the gradious assumptions are yours (and Del's). I'm not asking for proof, just more evidence to JUSTIFY why you so ardently belief this. Again, there are serious social and political implications for promoting this belief. Do you see how evil people could use that position to PURPOSELY miseducate or undereducated an entire class of people they don't like in order to lable them as violent and use that as an excuse to eliminate them from society?

Well first of all, I never did understand why some people needed magazines and porn videos to masturbate too....lol. I have a vivid imagination. Even as a teenager if I was alone that night and needed to "beat that meat" all I had to do was close my eyes and Thelma Evans (among others) would pop up grinning at me. But.............. To be honest, if I really thought they had the goods on me AND I thought paying them off would protect me.....I wouldn't have a problem paying them. But again, those two criteria must be met. It's not enough for them to prove they have the goods on me, they must also demostrate that me paying them will get them off my back. It also depends on how much harm their information would cause. I don't jack off to porn, but if they just had a picture of me nude or having sex....I ain't paying them $50, lol. I mean, really my friends and family KNOW I have a diick and they KNOW I need to get "treated" from time to time, either by my woman or by myself...lol. It's nature, so what....am I supposed to be "embarassed" by this or something?????

Obviously this thread is open to discussion from everyone..... Cynique said something in another thread that I've been meaning to question her on for weeks but when I log on I tend to get so involved in other topics that I forget to ask. She said: "All my female friends tended to be like me. Our tough bitchy facades were almost a litmus test. If a guy could hold his own with us, we'd let down our guards and be nice and sweet. Unfortunately, i think more flunked the test than passed it. We were in the vanguard of ball-bustin' black sistas. (Something I'm not particularly proud of.)" https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/5260-what-do-you-think-of-the-ongoing-battle-between-pionner1-and-kalexander2/ Now, she already said it wasn't something she's proud of and I'm not accusing her of endorsing it, but I'm just curious as to the purpose or intent behind this behaviour because MANY women have confided in me the same thing but when I ask them why the do this most couldn't give me an answer. I don't want to say this "dissing" of men who approach you is EXCLUSIVE among AfroAmerican women, but I've certainly observed this type of behavior since childhood even in school and I don't recall observing it or experiencing it from women of other races or ethnicities. I remember as far back as elementary school a girl could be straight up INLOVE with a boy but will diss the hell out of him in public and repeatedly turn him down UNTIL she she sees him with another girl....then she'll break down and throw herself at him, lol I've seen it so many times that I started playing games with girls and having a female friend PRETEND to be my girlfriend in order to get the one I wanted. But it's a shame you have to do all of that game playing in our community. So this is what I want to know............... What is the REAL PURPOSE of some women insulting and berating the men who approach them even if those men may be attractive? Clearly you're trying to weed out people....but WHO and WHY? Are the men who "pass the test" somehow emotionally stronger or smarter than the average men? And if so how is hooking up with THESE men (who past the test) benefiting the community? This type of "game playing" between the men and women has been occuring for generations so: Has it produced stronger men? Stronger relationships? Has it produced stronger or smarter children? What benefit are we getting out of this type of game playing and testing that so many of our people engage in?

Del This is why I decided to challenge that position in the first place. Like you said, it CERTAINLY could be used as propaganda! Those beliefs taken to the extreme could be very dangerous and damaging politically and socially in this society because it could lead to masses of people being unfairly incarcerated and quite possibly "eliminated" for no other reasons except the fact that they are considered "uneducated". This has historically been one of the arguments for negative eugenics. 　 Troy 　 I don't really understand what you mean by that statement, but I'm sure it is not a position that I've asserted here, or in our in previous conversations, nor is it related to the title of the conversation you started: "Are Less Educated People More Prone To Violence?" When I say I'm challenging the idea, I'm not saying it's necessarily untrue....I'm asking you to PROVE that it IS true. And statistics on those in who are imprisoned in a legal system that requires money to adequate representation isn't my idea of proof. is obvious, to any educated person, that prisoners are significantly less educated than the general public. Again there is a correlation between education and propensity to violence. This is nt really up for debate. We can debate the reasons for this correlation, but I suspect we will find common ground there. Yes, I agree that those in prison are less educated than those in the general public. But what I can't agree on...unless you can find me proof....is that those in prison actually COMMIT MORE CRIME (violent or otherwise) than those in the general public. By continuing to use that example you're making two broadbased assumptions: 1. You're assuming that everyone in prison are actually guilty of the crimes they are accused of. 2. And likewise you're also assuming that people who are freely walking around in the general public are typically law abiding and non-violent. I've said before that there are many reasons to CONSIDER why a person may be in prison besides the fact that they are guilty. -not being able to afford decent representations to clear them (one of the biggest reasons) -not having the right connections to keep them out of jail -not being smart enough to keep from getting caught while the smarter person who commited the same crime had a better plan There are far too many factors involved in why some people are incarcerated and others aren't than them simply being more violent. I'd like to return to my examples of TRAINED/EDUCATED police officers and military members who engage in far more violence than the average citizen including those who are less educated. They assault and KILL people.....but arent' incarcerated for it. How many soldiers do you know have been imprisoned for the killing they've done? You can't point to those incarcerated as an example of the most violent individuals in society.

This is why I am turning to eastern teachings to change the perspective that I have been raised with, Have you considered that most East Asians are abandoning or have abandoned THEIR OWN traditional "eastern teachings" for a more Western lifestyle? Look at Japan, Korea, China, ect....... For generations now they have abandoned much of that traditonal culture to adopt Western economic, social, and even moral standards. Even after war with the West and having two of their major cities nuked and hundreds of thousands of their own people maimed and killed by the West, the Japanese have almost totally submerged themselves into Western culture. There is a reason for this.

Troy Cynique has been called a LOT of things on these forums over the past 15 years or so but "nonsensical" is not one of them, I'm not trying to put words in Del's mouth but I'm assuming that he called her response to my post "emotional and nonsensical" for the same reasons I thought it was......because it was entirely unwarranted and unrelated to the conversation. Me and you were talking about class and income and all of a sudden she leaps in and launches a demonic tirade calling me a loser who hangs out at starbucks begging for spare change and conversation....lol. Now you'd have to admit that emotional outburst WAS a little over the top. Why is it so hard for us to stay focused on the topic without the insults? I've articulated my point that those corrections officers most likely came from the middle class. Not necessarily the UPPER middle class, but still in the middle....now can anyone disprove that statement with SOLID EVIDENCE that most correction's officers come from either wealth or poverty?

I'm beginning to think that the amassing of extreme wealth has less to do with doing what is morally right or wrong and more to do with capitalizing off of collective effort. The Whites of America have managed to accumulate large amounts of wealth by coming up with ideas and working together to put those ideas in motion. SOME of those ideas were morally good like inventing new technology, and OTHERS of those ideas were morally bad like enslaving and murdering people. But in most cases, the common denominator was collective effort. AfroAmericans who are serious about becoming wealthy are going to have to learn to find common ground among eachother and work togther towards their goals.

Cynique You turned down my invitation in regard Lol....I'm sure I wasn't the first one to "turn down" your invitations.

Delano Politics also creates stratification although I believe this is a less clear stratification. You're right that there are many stratifications WITHIN what we called "middle class" and most politicians KNOW this and take advantage of the ignorance of that average American by telling WORKING CLASS people that if elected they will help the "middle class" without making it clear that it's the PROFESSIONAL CLASSES that they intended to help, not the lower working class. If Troy is Wyle E......then Cynique must be his Tasmanian Devil fresh out of that ACME box, lol. Cynique You're such a loser. You act as though stating what your position is, legitimizes it. And it doesn't. You're not an authority on anything. You have a degree from Starbucks College of Caffeinated Swill where you majored in opinion as fact, and minored in self-contradiction. You're nothing but a wanna-be who's never gonna-be because you're incapable of conceding your fallibility. (The issue of values is every bit as relevant as income, Dummy.) You try to bluff your way through life but you're not even good at doing that. I must not be that much of a loser...I can't seem to lose YOU.

Lol, that's Ok. I think WE BOTH know what your answer would have been...had you honestly given it.

Troy yes, I know, I just said that. What is you point? Lol, I was actually agreeing with you....if that's allowed. As far as not tipping being a low class value, I agree with that also. Most poor people don't have disposable income to just GIVE away to show appreciation for services that they have already paid for. Cynique Right, Troy! Except for a few predictable "pioneerisms" to muddy the picture, all Pioneer did was regurgitate everything you and i already said when we rebutted his original contentions. The only one who "muddied" the picture was YOU, attempting to introduce "middle class values" into the discussion as if it was the major criteria to distiguish between the classes......when clearly INCOME is the ultimate criteria. My position is crystal clear: The are TWO middle classes and most Corrections Officers come from one of those two.

As far as I'm concerned this discussion is open for ALL posters, not just me and Troy. I just called Troy's name because he was the one who made the statement we're discussing. Troy My definition says "...learning how to apply it." Besides it seems like you are less focused on trying to understand what Im saying and much more focused on trying to figure out different ways to dispute it. That is probably why you did not answer my question... I even put it in boldface so that you would not miss it Lol....what are you talking about? Not only did I answer your question in detail, the FIRST word in answer to your question was -NO. And to be clear, my position is NOT that educated people commit just as many violent crimes. I've said at the beginning that I don't have the proof to actually back that position up. What I'm doing is challenging the idea that educated people are less violent because of it's social and political implications. Further, that list of reasons I provided wasn't meant to be proof or even evidence to DISPROVE what you said, but to provide you with reasonable CONSIDERATIONS as to why your assumption that fewer educated people are in prison for violent crimes simply because they are less violent. But seriously, do you REALLY need me to provide "evidence" or "proof" that educated people have more resources and connections than the uneducated????

Cynique Most of them will tell you they are middle class. They may not be very knowledgable about the categories that econonmists and sociologists used to define people, but they know they're NOT in poverty like those homeless people or those people living in the projects....and the know they're NOT rich like Trump. They're in the middle. A person can be middle class without "middle class values" as much as they can be human without HUMANITY. If a person is neither in the lowest classes of destitution or the highest classes of wealth....they are simply in the MIDDLE. Troy Ofcourse just like a person can be in the middle class and not have middle class values, they can be poor and HAVE middle class values. A lot of poor families stress higher education which is a middle class value. Most poor people will even TIP when they go to a restaurant or order pizza to be delivered, but tipping is actually a middle class value.

Cynique You are missing the entire point. What does all that "viable alternative" blather have to do with me challenging someone to disprove that Whites remain in world-wide control because they are, indeed, superior to others??? It's not THE point....it's YOUR point. Originally I asked you a question, what was the alternative to White Supremacy? Instead of asnwering you invited me to a debate about whether or not White people were superior. My question remains, but a simple "I don't know" would suffice if that's the case.

The Nazi SS were highly training, but were evil as hell, personally killing many non-Arians. I'm not talking about people who are educated to improve themselves not to d the bidding of others (like police officers and MBAs). You're ADDING to the definitions we agreed upon. What a person does WITH their education is irrelevant to whether or not education itself...which is an increase in knowledge or training.....makes one more or less violent. Besides, I believe I read something in another thread where either you or Cynique said being more educated means they should be able to think better and more for themselves instead of allowing others to manipulate their thinking for them, so killing people because you were "just following orders" would challenge that. 　 　 　 Do you think that the percentage of people with a college education, incarcerated for violent crime is higher than the percentage of people in the general populations? No, I absolutely do not think so...however there could be many different reasons for this OUTSIDE of them simply being less violent, including: 1. Being more educated made them SMART enough to commit their crimes and get away with them and/or 2. Being more educated gave them a higher income allowing them to afford more legal resources to stay out of jail and/or 3. Being more educated means they have MORE FRIENDS who are lawyers, judges, and police officers to get them off the hook ...among other reasons.