richardmurray

@Cynique You asked when did Obama deny Black Tribalism I quote obama in bold during his more perfect union speech it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. In one speech obama denied a set of truths. The changes desired by the various tribes in the black populace in the usa can not be in an alliance. I repeat, if a black person wants to leave to africa and become wealthy how does that connect with a black person that wants to be mayor of a city in the usa. It doesn't. I don't want to repeat about how some black people want to kill whites. I think it is obvious their desires for change don't fit well with black people who want to be presidents of the usa and have white colleagues. But he also denied white tribes. And combining, he denied the tribalism in the usa. HE denied three tribalisms in one pretty famous speech. But he said it earlier in the illinois state senate. Using my criteria all usa presidents are failures? I said the following What did I say that suggested Obama failed himself? Based on my criteria Obama never failed himself or the black tribe that he represents . I argue, Obama helped the black tribe he represents plus himself extremely. BUT that doesn't mean he helped other black tribes nor that he wanted to. Based on his words he seems to think he is, but that is an error many in his tribe always had. ala Frederick Douglass, ala the black people who fought to create the usa. They had the same thinking as Obama. It isn't new. I am not justifying I am part of the legion of black men who think obama was a failure. I am describing how those black men are wrong cause obama doesn't represent the village, he only represented one tribe. While I am also describing how those legions of black men who view obama as successful are also wrong, cause obama didn't help the black village, he helped a set of black tribes in the village. What I am doing is stating false two dysfunctional and quite repeated narratives. Obama succeeded for himself and the tribes in the black populace of the usa he is a pat of while he failed the tribes int he black populace of the usa he is not a part of AND , that is ok! IT isn't a negative. It isn't negative. What I am regaling is a desire for the black tribes to get out of each others way, and accept what each wants to do. To turmoil, fair enough, we accept to oppose. i don't think either of us like to dislike:) To your divorcing the black populace, that is cool. Again, the usa has always had a tribe of black divrocees from the black populace, in isolation or passing. I guess you are an isolate. It makes total sense to me. The Black populace has a history of failure in the usa. Humans like to succeed or be part of the winners, if you can't pass into the winners, individualism is the path. Luckily for Black divorcees the usa supports individualism against group activity naturally. The following is not for you Cynique. To the other who may read this, I see the usa as an empire, all empires are always dealing with internal + external chaos but that is expected as the empire exist. No empire in the history of humanity hasn't been in the exact same condition as the usa now. The modern global system was created and is managed by the usa. Did not the usa make israel where palestine once stood? Did not the USA invite financially poor people for fiscal poor labor plus votes absent making the current populace financially viable or sturdy across the board? Did not the usa after defeating the Soviet Union manage its creation into modern Russia? Did not the USA after defeating the Soviet Union define the global economy which all countries are apart of in various ways? The USA , like all empires in human history, acted foolishly because it had the military to do so. For me, humanity is just fine. For those worried about the USA, it has many many years to go before it kicks the bucket. Will the USA change in the near future, potentially, but its mismanagement of itself is the cause. People who loved the usa: black/white/native/latino/muslim/christian all warned , wrote books. But were not heeded, which is common in empires. But all will be ok. @ProfD For those communalists in the black populace, i advise they simply help their tribe and don't waste time reconciling the tribes for a fair reason. Many tribes goals have no bridge, didn't in the past and will not in the future.

@Cynique All I said was obama failed all black tribes in not admitting the tribalism. I never suggested he wanted to aid all black tribes or sought out to help all black tribes or one black tribe. But it was a failure, because of his position. When you are in a position of power, all of your actions breed successes plus failures, but not all successes or failures are based on what you want to do. If I run a school newspaper, and all I want is to tell the stories I want and i don't care about the readership of the paper, the readership of the paper is my success or failure , regardless of my intent. We... what I know is that Black Unity has failed multiple times in the past in the usa or the british colonies that preceded. I don't see black unity as elusive, it has happened a number of times, but it failed to reach their goals. I am not as extreme as you but the populace in the USA, which is far beyond any other in terms of multiracial makeup, is becoming more and more mixed, ala like latin america. And it makes sense. Latin America always had more people than anglo america and the opening of the usa in the 1960s mostly put latin americans in the usa, which leads to a more latin american interpretation to race, which is complex and full of fluidities. In parallel though, many communities in the usa are retaliating against this. I don't think the earth or humanity is in turmoil at all. I think that the usa has far more chaos in it than most places. The USA causes more chaos than any other with its meddling. But the USA was never a wise empire. But that makes sense cause the usa was never a wise country. It is a country based on genocide[native american]+ enslavement[blacks]+unbounded greed[whites] and that is a very negative trio.

@Cynique Does a problem exist that is deeper than the pecking order ?I say yes. White people pitting black people against each other as the masters is inevitable. But, the question is how do black people reply to white people themselves plus the usa? Some black folk kept in the house, hated whites or worked to kill whites. Some black folk kept in the field hated whites or worked to kill whites. Some black folk kept in the house, served whites lovingy or aided white power. Some black folk kept in the field served whites lovingly or aided white power. Black people's reaction to whites themselves is where the black tribes differences vary most potently. In my reading of the works of zora neale hurston, whom I love, I find little mention of internal black colorisms from blacks who lived before the war between the states. While in the letters during reconstruction I see a rise in colorism mentions. Which to me suggest, I admittedly can't know for sure, black folk after the war between the states, in our again, negative situation, grew the internal color war to fight for scraps. To paraphrase mlk jr , bootless people trying to pick themselves up by bootstraps. But again, the white populace is why we were fighting for scraps. In the usa today, the black populace has more tribes than ever before, and the unity of skin or background, ala DOS isn't enough. But the reason black unity failed in the past wasn't internal multivision,by my reading, it was a far simpler reason. We simply failed. Unity can fail. The irish took near 1000 years to get rid of the english and only got 3/4 of their island then. So technically they still haven't won. It takes time. you have many losses in a time, when up against a stronger opponent. But your losses are not because of your own multivision, you are simply weaker. As an enslaved people who were completely enslaved, not being allowed to even raise ourselves, that is a very negative start point to want to take over your masters. We don't have a situation like the irish or the palestinean. If any parallel to Black populace in the usa exist , i argue it is the romani or gypsies of europe. They live throughout all europe, are a part of european culture, but don't have any control of one country of europe. the Black populace in the usa is a similar story. Is it the same goal? Cynique, you think a black person wanting to go out and kill white people, is the same goal as a black person wanting to be president of the usa? Maybe you do, but for me at least, It isn't the same and I think that is where many in humanity get it wrong. Black donkeys side Black elephants are two sides of the same coin. yes. But, black people still desiring garveyism. Black people desiring militant stances against whites , are not the same thing as black people wanting to be elected officials in the usa. Obama could had served all black tribes, by admitting his actions aided only one black tribe. In my view, obama failed , like smiley failed, in admitting the tribalism. Obama couldn't publicly say that many black people want something he by default hinders. Again to smiley, he failed in admitting that Obama isn't failing the black populace, but only serves one group in the black populace. Smiley mischaracterized obama as a black person trying to unite all the tribes or responsible for uniting all the tribes. That isn't true, at least to me. When Obama said he is the president of all america, I knew he was correct. BUT, how many black people want black elected officials to be concerned with all in the usa. I argue, half or maybe more of black people in the usa , definitely a solid 30% to 40% wouldn't mind a black elected official who is unconcerned to the plight of the non black. And he couldn't because to admit such a thing is to state the usa isn't the country for all, which is a key philosophy of obama and black people like him. But history to be blunt, proves that position false. And, i will add, a third tier, Cornell WEst. WHile Smiley is clearly speaking from the black nationalist tradition in the usa which is older than the usa itself, it comes from the british period. Obama is speaking from what I call the black statian position which is as old as the usa itself. Cornell west is speaking from the moral position. He wanted Obama to be a moral leader. Obama wasn't a priest, but a lawyer. And moreover, the kind of leadership it takes to make an empire have a code of conduct is... rare. So in obama/smiley/west you have three tribes. Not to mention the likes of armstrong williams who are black fiscalists or Clarence Thomas who is a Black individualist, a growing group, which makes sense with all the failures of unity as well as the dysfunction in so many black tribes. I have to end with a point to the total stranger who may read this, what I said before only concerns the black populace in the usa. I have travelled. The black populace under every other government in humanity, to be blunt is a different makeup and what goes on in the usa's black populace doesn't apply at all, and if you apply the black populace in the usa to black populaces under any other government you will get dysfunction.

topics Cento series, 23rd round Rainforest pokemon Fright-ing poetry challenge part 1 Cursed costumes entries Dates IF YOU MADE IT THIS FAR: 5 minute yoga, Mary Lou Williams plus James P Johnson play, Statian wives, sustainability multilog, halloween visual game https://rmnewsletter.over-blog.com/2023/07/10/29/2023-rmnewsletter.html

@Cynique the problem with Barrack Obama's presidency goes into the deeper problem in the Black populace in the USA which is older than everyone in this forum by hundreds of years, that Obama couldn't do anything about. The Black populace in the USA has tribes. There is no WE! in the black populace in the usa and I will be blunt, their is no We in the USA. Back to black people in the usa, the tribes in the black populace of the usa have different desires , different wants, always have. It isn't new. The USA was founded, again i repeat, with black people who fought to stop the usa from going into existence, while a lesser quantity but far more than one black person fought to start the usa. What bothers me, is that for some reason, most black groups in the usa, while they clearly differ on what they want for themselves or for the black populace en large, don't seem able to accept when other black people differ with them. Is the black populace in the USA a community of prosyletizers? I nearly hate proselytizing

MEssage me and we can share emails and I will read it. I don't see a link to the work in your post body. The problem is both sides of the argument hold truth. Christianity is a set of religions, not one religion, with one common denominator. The role of jesus as the beginning of christianity. In Christian history, the bible as legitimate or what it contains have all been contested between christians The identity of jesus has been contested between christians in christian history. IS christianity white? no Can a form of christianity be about and for white people? yes. Is the form of christianity imposed on black people by whites in the american continent and then continued through black enslaved parents or white masters to enslaved children about and for white people? yes Name one form of christianity not about and for white people? ethiopian tewahedo , a branch of eastern orthodox. Are all elements of Christianity by Black Americans , canada to argentina, about and for white people? no, an example are the negro spirituals. i didn't gospel music, I said the negro spirituals. Jean Ann , you are correct , christianity as a set of religions that exist throughout humanity are open to all. But, all the forms of christianity, in the american continent were initially made about and for white people, regardless of the manipulations black people made later. So what is the answer... your book. What you are doing is in the spirit of the earliest christian literature, the gospels, which originally had thousands of versions, not just those given governmental support after nicea. So keep i tup. I will take a look. If you want some inspiration consider my book https://www.kobo.com/us/en/ebook/gospel-of-joseph

@ProfD The historic truth of both men, douglass+mlk jr, is at the end of their lives both men were opposed by a majority of black activist, while evangelized by white media. Douglass was booed mightily by all black crowds at the end of his life. And MLK jr was called a coward or some negative by an ever growing list of younger black leaders who saw dysfunction in his strategy, and definitely its results. But when both men died, they were respected for their activities by most black folk with no bad talk to them even with the negative results to their guidance. But white media used each as a false prophet really. Making them some sort of wisened black leaders when in the black community at the time of their death most black people acting to improve the black condition opposed both. Yes MLK jr was murdered by a white man while preaching to black people not to be violent in response to white violence. When Malcolm died MLK jr said Malcom's death was tragic an example of how malcolm lived. MLK jr didn't mean malcolm was violent but malcolm accepted violence from the black community against violence. from the white community, MLK jr didn't. But the violence from the white community murdered mlk jr. His death was a greater tragedy than malcolm. MAlcolm accepted fighting whites led to death, he knew this cause whites killed malcolm's garveyite father, who was a preacher as well. So malcolm being murdered was had in hand with his father's. But, MLK jr is truly tragic. A man who literally was murdered by those he continually told his own people not to retaliate against when similar happened to them.

I will say I am Nationalist/ADOS , a different tribe. ... It would had been better or the future if many leaders in the past especially in the frederick douglass/mlk jr mold embraced other tribes . I think both of them, sadly were too bound in speaking to black people who opposed or disagreed as if they needed to stand with them or agree. I do oppose your positions. But only cause my positions are simply different. It isn't a matter of liking. yes, i love words and don't care for how words ae conveyed in the usa by many.

@ProfD In this community, forum posters, including me + you, have discussed that different tribes of Black people exist in the black populace in the usa. Said groups vary in how they define leadership in the black populace in the usa, all forms/the history of the black populace in the usa all forms/ how to interpret the history of the black populace in the usa, all form/ the varying rise in strength or fall in strength of various black tribes in the black populace in the usa, all forms/ the relationship of black people to the usa government, all forms [colonial british to modernity]/ and more. I accept the existence of varying tribes in the black community in the usa. i don't see it as problematic. I wish more Black people embraced their own tribe in the village instead of the proselytization stance of applying their tribes viewpoint as a standard or reference for all. Losing isn't complacent. I always tell Black children, we lost and usually lose. Losing isn't evil. the NAtive American lost more and still lose today, have they been complacent? the palestinean lost, still losing, it wasn't from complacency. Hell, the Gauls weren't complacent when they lost to the roman empire. Losing does not equal complacency. Yes, Black people tried black colleges/black churches/black cities ala exodusting/ Black movement to Africa/ black urban armed movement/Federal law ala civil rights act that black people allowed themselves to be abused nonviolently, but we didn't get what we worked very hard for in any of those plans. It happens. Korea spent hundreds of years a satrap of china or nippon, that wasn't because of complacency. I find your word choice terrible at times, especially if a black child heard this. I can tell you with 1005 assurity, not all non DOS black folk are totally satisfied with hyper federalism or the usa. I know non DOS black folk who returned to the caribbean or africa. I know DOSers who left for the caribbean or africa. Again, my primary issue with your stance is the inability of you to accept the black populace in the usa is a village with many tribes. Now maybe you want the village to only have one tribe but that goal is an extreme challenge

@aMhayes made a post about voting rights , linked at the bottom of this post, and as always I think of the history in all questions. The question is always, how do you get from there to here. How did the Black populace that was majority anti white in the british colonial form of the usa become majority pro -usa in modernity,multiple centuries? A long process, constant white opposition/suppression of black individuals/groups/leaders who oppose embracing whites or the USA in the black populace in the USA, a persistence among black individuals or groups who want to embrace whites or the usa, whether financed by whites or not. Now what does what was have to do with black federalism? nothing. But it is important to comprehend how an angry/vengeful populace to whites plus the usa, becomes not. It is important to display to any black children the truth about the black populace in the usa or elsewhere. Now to Federalism, from the minority in the minority of Blacks that sided with white enslavers to found the usa through frederick douglass to Obama/Sharpton/side most Blacks of above normal financial wealth or government, A form of federalism is what they talked about and what black people in the usa rarely say. While white people spoke of the usa alongside state pride, ala the virginian, black people who supported the usa, a minority in the black populace at the usa's infancy, never spoke of state pride but usa pride. Frederick Douglass spoke of USA pride, he never spoke in terms of one state in the union or even a region. The words from Martin Luteher King jr to those like Obama is clearly federal. But of a specific form. This is hyper federalism. I realize now what it is Black people, of a differing philosophy to my own, in the USA want. They want a hyper federalism. A federalism that imposes on state/county/city the only legal protections in the usa that can allow a anti-violent , financially impotent or lesser community the freedom to grow aside a militaristically powerful, financially potent one. That is constitutional law. States laws by default are 50 forms, to varying to rely upon. Counties and cities are worse. But, the federal law is the zone. The problem is leaders among said Black folks never publicly call for hyper federalism. https://aalbc.com/tc/topic/10615-looming-supreme-court-decision-regarding-voting-redistricting/#comment-63784

@aMhayes Two things, first, You referred to your father^2? One of the problems when Black individuals in the USA today speak on the past, is we forget to mention how anti-white + anti-statian (USA) most black people were. Remember, most free blacks fought against the creation of the usa during the war of secession from the british empire , fought against the maintenance of the usa in Britain's attempt to retake the usa, the garvey movement in the black populace of the usa was more popular than booker t washington's schools or the white jew financed NAACP or the call for embracing the usa by Frederick douglass at the same time. And the garvey movement while nonviolent was 100% anti-usa, it was anti -american, his base idea was the entire american continent: usa/jamaica/brasil is no good for black folks and that the entire Black Continental American community whose forebears were enslaved need to find a home from the place they were ripped from , by white = black hands, which is the continent of africa, notice I didn't say a country in africa but the continent itself. DOSers are not citizens of any particular country, we are citizens of the continent for our forebears came from all over. I end with , Black people since the nascent of the usa have fought to be part of it, to be statian/american, but most black people were anti white + anti statian in the nascent, this is fact. so the black community has slowly developed a majority into the fight you speak of. And why is that important. When you speak of the fight for rights, when you suggest a timelessness you are being unfair to where most black people were philosophically in the past. Second, I once talked to a person from europe who disliked the european union, which is functionally, the articles of confederation applied to most of europe with a financial binding secured by the usa. The question is, can you name one city in south carolina that is financially bustling/ripe/potent and dominated by black people in all sectors: public/private/la enforcement/education/utilities? South Carolina at one time in its history had a majority black legislative body yet today most, including me, can't name one city in south carolina that is completely a positive example of black power. The why is well known, white power. But what is the point? When you speak of the constitution and federalism, what you are speaking about is the federal government of the usa being a greater law enforcer to the states. But you are forgetting that the entire point of the constitution was only to make the federation strong enough to survive, not for federal law to make states impotent or molded by the federal government de facto. I comprehend the strategy of using federal power and trickling it down to the states then counties then cities, but the the whole point of seperation of powers between the states and the federal government is to deny the federal government the function that I think black people like you, like frederick douglass have always wanted.

yes @aMhayes the point is about the structure of the student body in the two times, they are significantly variant.

you mischaractirize, I listtended to the whole thing she was speaking about the people she hired as staffers. Not the black statian community. The issue is , why did she hire them?

Not a stretch, two groups who are the same thing can always be compared. But their variances are not tiny. The students of the 1960s came from basically two primary groups. Whites/Blacks. Asians/LAtinos in the 1960s were much smaller groups than today. That matters on a number of levels, especially organizationally. Today, many students in the usa support the stated demands. THe modern student body in the usa isn't philosophically one. They were not in the past, but the lesser multiracial quality meant they organized easier. Today, it is harder to organize when you have so many varying groups.

I was unable to get all the links to various work. I searched the group and early posts to see as many as possible. If you are an owner of a pokemon and want a link , merely comment with the U.R.L. to your work and I will add it. The official post https://www.deviantart.com/charityguildmaster/art/Rainforest-Charity-Collab-115-CLOSED-979751392 I used https://www.image-map.net/ to construct the image map. Prior post concerning the rainforest collab

topics Cento poetry series - Twenty third round Thoughts to the Film "American fiction" with Issa Rae + Jeffrey Wright based on the book "Erasure" by Percival Everett Hovergirls from Gdbee Calendar Dates IF YOU MADE IT THIS FAR: Fae Farm, Book contracts with Jane Friedman, The Fall That Saved US cover reveal in THistle and Verse, Jann Wenner interview https://rmnewsletter.over-blog.com/2023/07/10/22/2023-rmnewsletter.html

Do you like their work in general @Troy

from Bloomsbury, learn more https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2500&type=status

more information https://aalbc.com/tc/profile/6477-richardmurray/?status=2500&type=status