Donate SIGN UP

Answers

161 to 180 of 245rss feed

First Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
divebuddy

No - 'fight for' doesn't mean 'have a fight'. It can easily mean, 'protested for the right to'.

Can you envisage a situation where a white British person has had to protest for the right to use a water fountain, or rent a house or sit in a particular place on a bus?

In the context of what black Americans did during the Civil Rights movement?

Seriously - what circumstances lead to that in the UK?

When did this happen?

It feels like a flippant remark, but I've not seen anything to back it up or dismiss it from AOG.
-Talbot-

Thanks - but like I said before...when looking at those headline stats, we should also look at underlying causes.
Question Author
sp1814

Look I will say this for the last time, as I have already pointed out, I did not literally "Fight" for that seat on the bus, I did in fact "argue" for that seat on the bus and "Rode on the bus" was never mentioned, the rest water fountain and rented house are as put.

/// Do you see why some people took it to mean that you'd faced the same sort of discrimination that black Americans have due to segregation? ///

I can't be held responsible for what "some people" take things to mean especially on AB some come up with all manner of strange conclusions.

/// discrimination that black Americans have due to segregation ///

That never came into the question that I asked, perhaps it did for those who seem to permanently carry a chip on their shoulders, but thankfully I do not.
I have posted the links because I was sceptical of the one you posted.


Generally the cause of crime is criminals.
Question Author
sp1814

/// I didn't tell you why those who were killed by police officers joined the march, because I don't know. ///

I don't think that those who were killed by police officers could possibly joined in the march, since they are dead.
-- answer removed --
Question Author
Zacs-Master

/// Obama is of mixed race so it's not completely correct to say he's the first black president. ///

Most Black/White mixed race persons consider themselves to be black, never white, for some strange reason.

President Obama, is regularly classed as America's first black President.
-- answer removed --
Do you want to use the fact that the us has its first president who refers to himself as black, indicates that black Americans are equal to white ones throughout the continent?
DIVEBUDDY he didn't have to fight for the right to sit in the disabled seat, he had that right already and no doubt there would have been a notice near the seat explaining that it should be vacated if a disabled person or possibly an elderly person wanted to sit there.

There is a logic behind it but where is the logic behind having white and non-white seats?

-- answer removed --
// Avatar Image
anotheoldgit
Question Author
Islay

Since it is only the minorities that have taken to the streets, obviously the majority don't seem to have anything to protest about. //

I DON'T BELIEVE IT !!!!
AOG

Arguing for a seat on a bus, a rented house and to drink at a water fountain is not the same as arguing the case for the rights to do those things.

I'm sure you see that there is a world of difference between the two.

divebuddy

I'm not saying we should swap statistics. I'm saying that if we don't take a holistic view of crime, then we don't understand crime.

Ivy League students of all races are far less likely to fall into criminal activity than those who are brought up in the projects of Brooklyn or trailer parks in Wisconsin.

Just focussing on one set of stats is misleading.
-- answer removed --
Interesting info gram backing up DBs figures which appear to be FBI based:
https://infogr.am/Black-34991937313
DIVEBUDDY are black folk genetically predisposed to commit crimes?
More interesting / enlightening reading. I'm not,sure who the people behind the facts and conclusions are but they don't appear to by politically or,racially bias and the evidence seems to be well researched. I must admit to being slightly staggered at the stats hence my on going reading up on the subject:
https://therationalists.org/2016/07/13/why-do-black-people-commit-more-crime/
I was going to jokingly suggest eugenics as the next topic of discussion for controlling crime and, possibly,rabble rousers.
Until I read this...it's been suggested already. Horrifying,really.

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/aso/databank/entries/dh23eu.html
-- answer removed --
In ZAC's latest link it says about black crime rates and poverty, "It follows that poverty will create increased levels of non-violent crime such as theft, burglary or drug-dealing, but in the absence of available wealth as a symbol of status, impoverished young people use capacity for violence instead."

If the theory is correct, the question then has to be, are black folk disproportionately more impoverished than non-black folk and if they are, what are the reasons?

161 to 180 of 245rss feed

First Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

What Do These 'rabble-Rousers' Hope To Achieve?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.