Michael Fisher said...
You need to stop insulting people, DV. It retards discussion. You are very effective in the placement of your praise and insults. It detracts from the dialectic process of back and forth reasoning that leads to truth.
Actually Michael,It is a lesson in supremacy.
I am demonstrating that the creation, manipulation and distribution of myth, truth and ultimately power, is not exclusive to "white" people.
Which is the inherent danger in the perpetuation of memes like your "Global System of White Supremacy".
Its congenital implication is that black people are forever doomed to bring spears to gunfights.
The Hip Hop cats have been trying to teach you older cats and the Art Neanderthals the power of myth authorship and self-aggrandizement for some time. As you argue to ban rap, white men have been teaching their version of Hip Hop in schools for 100 years. "Educated" Negros borrow tens of thousands of dollars to send their children to white rap institutions disguised as "colleges". No wonder when they come out, they worship the God of white power.
Compared to the scathing ad hominem fashionably applied to rappers, your complaint about insults is like Israelis complaining about terrorism.
Method. Madness.
Intellectual Insurgent said...
"As for the Arabs. In trying so desperately to become white again they are the most pathetic of the bunch. There is nothing more pathetic than ex-white people continuing to shit on black people while trying to escape heir newly, and not-so-newly acquired Nigger status." M. Fisher
Fascinating Fisher. Fascinating.
The impenetrable fog around your logic is finally starting to dissipate. When Arabs were winning and at the height of the game of empire, they were White. When they lost, they were magically transformed into "Niggers".
It appears, thus, that my "color" depends on whether the group to which I am assigned is winning or losing. I would have been White had I lived in Arab-ruled Spain but I'm a Nigger now that Arabs are at the bottom of the totem pole?
From this, the only conclusion that appears possible is that the Fisher standard of Black v. White is not a matter of race but, rather,
White = Winner
Black = Loser
You also refer to Jews as "ex-non-Whites". Presumably, they are now White because they are winning at whatever it is you value. Thou dost protest much.
Submariner said...
Mr. Fisher, unfortunately your formidable intellect has succumbed to the conventional narrative promulgated since the rise of Mao that the Soviet Union was behind the successful revolts of indigenous peoples in the last century. The belief then, as now, is that the natives were hardly in a position to counter much less overcome the overwhelming technological superiority of American, British, French, Portugese, Belgian, and other forces without foreign Communist interventon and support. The Russian bogeyman has been used as a default explanation for the successes of divergent figures including Lumumba, Castro, and Ho. [fucking brilliant] I credit David Halberstam with unveiling for me what was all too obvious but none dared to utter in my grade school classes: After defeating their Axis rival the Allies themselves were defeated by poor but determined peoples in the bush and rice paddies. - The myth which credits the Soviets also undermines the agency articulated by Third World peoples at the Bandung Conference of 1955. Why do you resist the evidence before you? General Giap, for one, is considered by some mainstream military historians to be one the top three most brilliant military strategists of the 20th Century, a century marked not merely by heroic resistance but actual triumphs of colonized peoples.
- Michael Fisher said...
- Submariner, what the hell are you talking about? Where did I credit the USSR with being "behind the successful revolts of indigenous peoples in the last century". I ain't crediting the Soviet Union with anything except the fact that it, for it's own white supremacist motivation, supplied the weapons to the Vietnamese. Is that a fact, or not. Where did the NVA's and the Vietcong's weapons come from?
- Three sources. A. Above all from the USSR, 2. Too a much lesser extent from the PRC, and 3. As far as the Vietcong was concerned largely captured/bought from the ARVN. I didn't say that the Russians fought the Vietnam War. Were you alive during that time? Bro.?
- @cnulan. As I told you before, you are veering closely towards Cobbism and, now, too, DV VDism. That is, sloganeering without concretely through a objective deductive process exposing the supposed logical fallacies of my argument.
- Now. Dina used the term "race". I'd like to know what she means by that. We'll proceed from there.
- cnulan said...
Michael, I'm with Dina, Sub, and MJB on this one.
You and DV are the most senior, resource rich, worldly, and experienced brothers in the afrosphere - and neither one of you is willing to go beyond trivialities and platitudes.
With you it's the GSWS. With Bro. DV, it's the Sabbatean Illuminati - but sadly - neither one of you is willing to step up to the baseline of genuine thought criminality and intellectual insurgency...,
51 comments:
Said it before. I love love love this image.
I believe there is a GSOWS. Dont tell me u dont. It is what it is.
Asia in general and China in particular are the first examples of the resurgence of non-Western peoples. Of course the ruling elite are busily working on contingency plans. Big ups to the Leonardo DaVinci of the blogosphere, Craig Nulan.
DV, do you have a public email address that you care to share with me?
What's happening Sub!?
denmarkvesey1822@hotmail.com
Anonymous said...
"I believe there is a GSOWS. Dont tell me u dont. It is what it is."
1) Show me.
2) If there was not a "GSOWS", how would we know?
3) People "believe" in what comforts them.
The taking of continents and sharingthem between european nations. The sharing of resources between european people and the denial of it to darker peoples. Come on Bro! Can You tell me about that picture please!!! Hilliel
"The taking of continents and sharingthem between european nations. The sharing of resources between european people and the denial of it to darker peoples."
Sounds like a Global System of Gun Supremacy to me homeboy.
How you project that onto - "white people" - sounds rather punk ass to me.
You need to stop insulting people, DV. It retards discussion. You are very effective in the placement of your praise and insults. It detracts from the dialectic process of back and forth reasoning that leads to truth.
I'm keeping, keeping, keeping this image.
But I got to take umbrage with this "myth authorship and self-aggrandizement" theory.
First of all as a Christian, you can't even begin to have a conversation about myth authorship without immediately being dimissed as an inveterate hypocrite. Before you can go there you need to establish who authored the myth that is the central focus of your spiritual world. And before you take this as an attack on Christianity, let me nip that in the bud. I'm not attacking anything or anybody, I am talking about who created the story. If you aren't willing to concede what the highest levels of your religious hierarchy already know, that the bible is simply the highest placed mythology of our era, there again you lose all intellectual authority to particiapate in the discussion.
Second, to your logic about hip hop cats and self aggrandizement, you don't ask for much from your icons do you? One of the first songs we taught my daughter, was the simple empowerment matra from the Godfather of Soul, " Say It Loud, I'm Black and I'm Proud" That's positve self aggrandizement, and it's something that I, as GSWS theorist, recognize as necessary to dismantling the system. There are other notable instances to be found in music, literature, etc. At what point did your standards lower to the point where Big pimpim became synomymous with racial pride and self-esteem? When did themes like "I'm all about money, so I'll do anything, rob, kill, poison my own community, to get that almighty dollar" get to be the summit of Black elevation? Should we all now aspire to all the gold teeth, ostentatious jewelry, and oversized rims we can get our grubby little hands on?
"I am demonstrating that the creation, manipulation and distribution of myth, truth and ultimately power, is not exclusive to "white" people."
Nope, you are demonstrating that some of us are engaged in a very poor parody of a psychotic and dysfunctional worldview. And I resent your characterization of my vocal and unflinching disaffection with what I consider self-destructive and non-productive memes masquerading as enlightement as an indictment of hip-hop as a genre. Again a creation of your own mind, and at least in my case, could not be further from the truth.
From the very first day of formal education in this country, as is the case in any country that is controlled by people who classify themselves as white, the indoctrination into the culture that is a manifestaion of the GSWS is begun in earnest. The education system is part of the GSWS. They need to do everything possible to deceive the world into believing that those categorized as white are superior to those categorized as non-white. A big part of that is controlling the formative education of the society. It's not a perfect plan, because the flow of information has not been completely interdicted, and because there are too many people who know the truth for the lies to stand unconfronted. In this reapect none of the smaller systems that comprise the larger GSWS are infallible, flawless, or omnipotent. That they can be dismantled is integral to a true understanding of the theory of GSWS. I cannot stress to you enough that whenever you feel like GSWS implies capitulation, you need to check yourself, because you are creating that straw man all by yourself.
Don't delude yourself into thinking that those of us who have pursued higher education in this system are necessarily the most tainted by it. The taint was established long before college. Many of us who overcome the conditioning, still recognize the need to tap into the structures of society, to engage in learning with a mind free from unconscious manipulation and indoctrination. Contrary to your nonsense about worshiping the god of white power, we are usually the only ones who are actually free of the Matrix. You rail against it from the inside if you don't even recognize that it exists.
DV said
"Sounds like a Global System of Gun Supremacy to me homeboy.
How you project that onto - "white people" - sounds rather punk ass to me."
DV, haven't the white people always had a monopoly on gun supremacy?
Nah Sista Accra. "White People" haven't had a monopoly on gun supremacy.
Whomever happens to have guns, has gun supremacy.
Guns are attainable. Whiteness isn't.
Associating supremacy with whiteness, is a self-defeating prophesy.
Brother Ex,
That's good stuff man. Really good. Best proselytizing effort yet by any of you Global System of White Supremacy faithful.
High Priest Michael Fisher should be proud of you. Something like Elijah Mohammad being proud of Farrakhan. Which must make CNu, Malcolm.
I'm running to a meeting. I'll straighten you out when I get back.
My man.
I'll come off the bench to substitute for DV while he's out. Let me state clearly that I place myself somewhere between Fisher and Vesey. Clearly there is a system of domination, and until very recently power was coalesced around Western Europe and North America.
However, one thing that my friends from the other side don't acknowledge is the rise of Asia, and to a lesser extent Africa, on the global economic scene. For some detailed analysis on this I would recommend Adam Smith in Beijing by Giovanni Arrighi.
Starting with Korea in 1950 (I guess you could go earlier to include China) there has been a successful social and political revolt against Western hegemony. After wars for liberation and self determination the traditional powers have had to contend with the ascendancy of the Third World. To hold onto a conventional theory of the global system of white supremacy strikes me as neglecting the entire Twentieth Century. If you are determined to adhere to such a belief you have to explain China, Vietnam, India, North and South Korea, Nigeria, South Africa, Brazil and other rapidly growing economies that maintain sovereignty.
To hold onto a conventional theory of the global system of white supremacy strikes me as neglecting the entire Twentieth Century. If you are determined to adhere to such a belief you have to explain China, Vietnam, India, North and South Korea, Nigeria, South Africa, Brazil and other rapidly growing economies that maintain sovereignty.
Sub,
Great points, although I would modify the timeframe a bit (I will put aside my quibbling about whether these nations, in fact, exercise sovereignty). It is perhaps, in our narrow window of existence, that one can see this so-called "White" supremacy across the planet, but even a brief review of history reveals that Africans, Asians, Arabs and other non-Whites had their turns at empire or, supremacy, as others may prefer to call it.
History topples empires all the time and replaces them with new ones, without regard to race. It is a matter of which group is able to comandeer military and financial power (the gun supremacy DV refers to above) at a given time. It's America now. It will be China tomorrow. That's the cycle of power - not racial supremacy.
Once military power is in place, myth must be propagated vis-a-vis culture and history in order to make the slaves voluntarily submit. It's too expensive to militarily subjugate people.
So, the empire creates a myth of supremacy that convinces people the colonizers are there for their own good, to liberate them, are more civilized and will help the savages become the same, etc. If the subjugated didn't internalize and accept this mythology, no empire could ever survive because resistance would be perpetual and costly.
A group of people convinced of their own superiority could never be mythologically subjugated because it would be an indignity. They might be conquered militarily but, spiritually and culturally, they remain free and this is what fuels resistance to military intruders. They believe their own myths to be superior and would never accept myths that make them second best, fractions of human beings, etc. They would fight to the death (as we see in Palestine, Iraq, Somalia, Nigeria) because anything less would be mental slavery.
A people with resilience and pride will wear down the toughest armies and have done so throughout history. That's why the colonizers always go after the mentally free - those who thumb their noses at competing myths are more dangerous than any army.
One cannot affirm GSWS and then pretend to think Blacks are on equal footing. They are mutually exclusive.
This is the problem with the GSWS cult. By worshipping at the altar of White supremacy, the GSWS faithful give the priests and practitioners more power than they deserve.
The Emperor has no clothes, but the GSWS followers are writing lengthy Cosmo articles about his latest fashions.
Dina...
"A group of people convinced of their own superiority could never be mythologically subjugated because it would be an indignity. They might be conquered militarily but, spiritually and culturally, they remain free and this is what fuels resistance to military intruders."
...says a member of the group which pioneered the modern version of the concept of white supremacy and taught it, by example, to the northern white barbarians in the first place.
...and whose late President, Anwar Sadat, refused to acknowledge himself as the Negro he was.
Hypocrites
@Submariner...
Aside from the fact that, bottom line, South Africa and Nigeria hardly are truly black-run countries, particularly not SA, Supremacy means "supreme". It doesn't mean "can't be challenged".
Now if it came down to an ultimate show down of violence between the countries you cited and the white dominated armed forces of the world, who would be able to inflict more violence upon the other?
You should also note that DV actually already agreed that the SR/WS is in full effect.
Don't let him b.s. you.
Like Submariner, I also stand somewhere in between DV and MF.
I believe that my life experience may be different from most people on here, having grown up in a country with 99% black people . All figure of authority were
black. So, my reality growing up was not one of different races trying to coexist.
It was when I moved to the US to study that I began to feel the impact of the white black dynamic. In the attitudes of both black and white people that I met.
It is a fact that the Western Empire( Europe and the US) is the dominant economic and military power and has been for some time.
From my perspective in Ghana, and this applies to most other African countries. ( Fact is, majority of the worlds black population lives in Africa)
The West is in control of our economies in Africa. Where we sell our primary commodities, to what the price is, what markets we have access to, what markets we don't. They do this through institutions like the WTO, IMF, World Bank and sometimes just plain threats of punitive economic sanctions.
Lets not talk about the Military dominance of the West ( White people).
The IMF and The World Bank dictate to us what our economic policies should be, and when ever an African Leader who has a mind of their own comes up, they are vilified and sometimes killed. ( Mugabe, Abacha)
So DV, as far as I can see, the reality is that these people are in control.
That does not negate the fact that there are psychological effects of the hundreds of years of domination ( which include events like slavery colonialism etc) on the dominated people .
This manifests itself in certain behavior which may be what DV refers to as plantation mentality.
Just my point of veiw.
I followed the link.
All I saw was someone hellbent on trying to prove DV wrong.
Futile effort toward a useless task. Just say your peace.
Perhaps your position would be more coherant if you simply stated why you believe a GSWS to exist, as opposed to endeavoring to twist someone else's statements into nonsensical support for your own wild assertions.
Stop posing questions and make some statements. And BTW, your deductive reasoning game needs some work.
Mr. Fisher, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea possess nuclear weapons. They have limited recurrent strike capability but any potential adversary would incur a terrible debt. In terms of numeric strength China and India match the West. In terms of sheer tenacity North Korea and North Vietnam fought American forces to a stalemate or outright victory. In any ultimate faceoff the best that the West could hope for is a pyrrhic victory. It's been over twenty years since I stepped foot in a dojo but a couple of things I recollect learning from Kyoshi Ronald Austin is that every weapon is simply an extension of the hand and I could seriously maim even the baddest mofo. There is a delusion that victory is determined on the battlefield or by the strength of arms. This seems a reasonable conclusion except that even Vergil knew that ostensibly conquered peoples can refuse to remain defeated in defeat. The bottom line for me is that any relevant theory of global white supremacy has to account for the the post World War I and II global turbulence characterized by the diminution of European power and the tenuous grasp of American hegemony.
Fisher,
You're funny. Arabs pioneered empire and gun/gunpowder supremacy and others were impressed and emulated it. Then the Arabs got beat at their own game and find themselves divided and conquered as they are today. To this day, however, they still believe they are superior enough to get back the old glory and keep their myths alive to motivate their children.
That's the cycle of power.
If you can't hang, if you can't compete, get off the court.
I doubt Chinese leaders sit around crying about dismantling White supremacy. They and others with self-esteem understand that this is all a game of chess and that they have some catching up to do on the board. They also know they have the ability to do that catching up. Instead of crying about White supremacy, they are at the chess board trying to figure out how to beat the competitor. You should try it sometime.
Start with the understanding that the pawns are not the same as the queen. Pawns are pawns, even if they are on the other side of the board.
I've been marinating on both sides of the Fisher-DV debate for some time and I too can't find a side to pick. Which, to me, is a beautiful thing.
I can see, empathize and feel both positions. My question is...at what point do we stop with the binary thinking...the either/or. Not saying either of you have ever asked that, but it's always how it ends up being pared down intellectually and emotionally. And to me, that is as destructive a meme as ever. Nod to DV.
And to me, it is indicative of self-propelling systems that have a life of their own and particular machinations and dynamics specific to this time and place. Nod to Fisher.
So I guess at this point I question why we (or anyone) needs to or has to play on the same 'chess board' that I.I. speaks of. I usually comment on sports and when the same arguments pop up again and again I always ask 'why don't folks just start their own leagues'. And I am disgusted at the way people dismiss that statement or find it 'crazy' or immediately reason as to why it's 'impossible'. That shit pisses me off!! And politically when the argument comes up (it's all the same, the sports, politics, hip-hop debates we have here and on other sites) and people throw out the 'starting on 1st base while others start on 3rd' bullshit, I immediately inquire as to why anyone would choose to play a rigged game. Why not build your own field; you can start on any base you damn choose or even choose not to have bases. Again, I am met with inherently powerless responses that make my skin crawl.
I love the debate, I love the fact that we all care enough to keep reaching and building and communicating, but I can't stand to see the same patterns repeated over and over and this is where Cnulan's very enigmatic offerings about brain chemistry and ritual addiction come in. Something is going on here because I know the schools of thought at war here and other blogs contain more synergy than we're willing to allow for and I'm not sure why.
For me personally, it's about finding the empowering threads and connective energy which may offer a new way of thinking AND feeling that allows for more insight/wealth than any of us imagined previously.
Anyway, I thank all of you for what you bring to my soul journey!
Dina...
"You're funny. Arabs pioneered empire and gun/gunpowder supremacy and others were impressed and emulated it. Then the Arabs got beat at their own game and find themselves divided and conquered as they are today."
This is what happened:
Arabs pioneered classifying themselves a white and turning Africans into Niggers and others were impressed and emulated it. Then the Arabs got beat at their own game and find themselves divided and conquered and reclassified into Sand Niggers first by by the Turks a few centuries ago and then more perfectly so by the Europeans a century and a half ago.
As to this anon...
I love it when folks who can not even say who they are go around making statements without backing them up. Well, show us where the deductive reasoning that is so weak exactly is so weak. However, since you asked for it, here's the proof
@Submariner...
"Mr. Fisher, China, India, Pakistan, and North Korea possess nuclear weapons. They have limited recurrent strike capability but any potential adversary would incur a terrible debt. In terms of numeric strength China and India match the West. In terms of sheer tenacity North Korea and North Vietnam fought American forces to a stalemate or outright victory."
With all due respect, but I am not questioning the courage and fighting capability of the people of Vietnam or those of Korea, or those of anyone else non-white for that manner. Plus, "non-whites" as a whole outnumber "whites" planet-wide 10 to 1. So it ain't about the numbers.
But you do have to concede that without the consistent material support of the other white supremacist power at that time, the Soviet Union, the Vietnamese would've had little more than sticks to throw at US troops.
Militarily you can forget about the Pakistanis and the Indians. Their nukes, too. Those were designed to reach each other, not the US.
As to the Chinese, they are making a good job at trying to challenge the SR/WS, but they'll tell you themselves, they are far from having been successful yet.
As for the Arabs. In trying so desperately to become white again they are the most pathetic of the bunch. There is nothing more pathetic than ex-white people continuing to shit on black people while trying to escape heir newly, and not-so-newly acquired Nigger status.
The only ones who were rcently successful in that were the ex-non-whites who say they are Jews and finally made it into
whiteness the price of which they paid and pay today is the organized mistreatment of black folks.
We'll see how long they get to remain white.
Oh, I almost forgot.
@ MJB said...
"I've been marinating on both sides of the Fisher-DV debate..."
There is no "Fisher-DV debate" because DV refuses to engage in a rational and logical process which could be challenged in order to establish an ontology for his use of "race" or even the "illuminati".
The fact that I ambushed his azz and caught him by surprise in that last post doesn't "a debate" make.
When it comes to debating, DV punks out and never, and I mean never, rises to the occasion.
And the one time I used his own madness against him, he flipped out like drunken sailor.
It was quite a sight...
As for the Arabs. In trying so desperately to become white again they are the most pathetic of the bunch. There is nothing more pathetic than ex-white people continuing to shit on black people while trying to escape heir newly, and not-so-newly acquired Nigger status.
Fascinating Fisher. Fascinating.
The impenetrable fog around your logic is finally starting to dissipate.
When Arabs were winning and at the height of the game of empire, they were White. When they lost, they were magically transformed into "Niggers".
It appears, thus, that my "color" depends on whether the group to which I am assigned is winning or losing. I would have been White had I lived in Arab-ruled Spain but I'm a Nigger now that Arabs are at the bottom of the totem pole?
From this, the only conclusion that appears possible is that the Fisher standard of Black v. White is not a matter of race but, rather,
White = Winner
Black = Loser
You also refer to Jews as "ex-non-Whites". Presumably, they are now White because they are winning at whatever it is you value.
Thou dost protest much.
Dina, first off.
What is "race"?
Dina's got your number brougham..., and there's only one way out of the infinite loop of deductive tail-chasing you've established - MJB spoke to that exit upthread;
For me personally, it's about finding the empowering threads and connective energy which may offer a new way of thinking AND feeling that allows for more insight/wealth than any of us imagined previously.
The interesting and challenging aspect of the thing is that a viable afrofuture must be organized around a measurably and repeatably more valid and sustainable system than the one it seeks to supplant.
Do you have a proposal for Smarter Living, or do you have suggestions for initiating a change management process that would lead to the same?
Mr. Fisher, unfortunately your formidable intellect has succumbed to the conventional narrative promulgated since the rise of Mao that the Soviet Union was behind the successful revolts of indigenous peoples in the last century. The belief then, as now, is that the natives were hardly in a position to counter much less overcome the overwhelming technological superiority of American, British, French, Portugese, Belgian, and other forces without foreign Communist interventon and support. The Russian bogeyman has been used as a default explanation for the successes of divergent figures including Lumumba, Castro, and Ho. I credit David Halberstam with unveiling for me what was all too obvious but none dared to utter in my grade school classes: After defeating their Axis rival the Allies themselves were defeated by poor but determined peoples in the bush and rice paddies.
The myth which credits the Soviets also undermines the agency articulated by Third World peoples at the Bandung Conference of 1955. Why do you resist the evidence before you? General Giap, for one, is considered by some mainstream military historians to be one the top three most brilliant military strategists of the 20th Century, a century marked not merely by heroic resistance but actual triumphs of colonized peoples.
Submariner, what the hell are you talking about? Where did I credit the USSR with being "behind the successful revolts of indigenous peoples in the last century".
I ain't crediting the Soviet Union with anything except the fact that it, for it's own white supremacist motivation, supplied the weapons to the Vietnamese. Is that a fact, or not?
Where did the NVA's and the Vietcong's weapons come from?
Three sources. A. Above all from the USSR, 2. Too a much lesser extent from the PRC, and 3. As far as the Vietcong was concerned largely captured/bought from the ARVN.
I didn't say that the Russians fought the Vietnam War.
Were you alive during that time? Bro.?
@cnulan.
As I told you before, you are veering closely towards Cobbism and, now, too, DV VDism. That is, sloganeering without concretely through a objective deductive process exposing the supposed logical fallacies of my argument.
Now. Dina used the term "race". I'd like to know what she means by that. We'll proceed from there.
As I told you before, you are veering closely towards Cobbism and, now, too, DV VDism. That is, sloganeering without concretely through a objective deductive process exposing the supposed logical fallacies of my argument.
Bro. Fisher, don't confuse the particular case of debating E.C. Hopkins specific resolution, premises, and conclusions with the general case of defending the more far reaching premises you've mechanically taken it upon yourself to promote.
In deductive reasoning, the evidence provided must be a set about which everything is known before the conclusion can be drawn. Since it is difficult to know everything before drawing a conclusion, deductive reasoning has little use in the real world.
It's been repeatedly pointed out to you by any number of well meaning commentators that your approach has reached the limits of its usefulness. That said, I sincerely doubt that anybody here is going to play the circular wordgame you've gotten yourself stuck in.
Mr. Fisher, I misspoke when I credited David Halberstam with first revealing to me the limits of white supremacy. It was actually my mom recounting stories about her native Haiti who first showed me that conviction and a machete could be a match for guns and cannons. When you assert " But you do have to concede that without the consistent material support of the other white supremacist power at that time, the Soviet Union, the Vietnamese would've had little more than sticks to throw at US troops." and express a disclaimer like "Militarily you can forget about the Pakistanis and the Indians. Their nukes, too. Those were designed to reach each other, not the US." and don't acknowledge the victories that actually happened then you come across as performing mental contortions to accomodate a theory rather than the other way around. I thank you for the vibrant exchanges that you've delivered here and elsewhere. It's approaching nearly one year since I first encountered the blogosphere and you with a few others stand out as someone who has shaped my mind for the better.
But I have yet to hear from you that David ever beat Goliath.
Fisher,
A better use of the mighty intellects who have been engaged in this exchange would be the creation and perpetuation of memes/myths that EMPOWER people.
Let's try it. You go first...
Dina, Stop equivocating. What is "race".?
Craig, this is going nowhere. Just let's agree to disagree.
No Michael, I'm with Dina, Sub, and MJB on this one.
You and DV are the most senior, resource rich, worldly, and experienced brothers in the afrosphere - and neither one of you is willing to go beyond trivialities and platitudes.
With you it's the GSWS. With Bro. DV, it's the Sabbatean Illuminati - but sadly - neither one of you is willing to step up to the baseline of genuine thought criminality and intellectual insurgency...,
All right then, Craig.
What is "race"?
"You and DV are the most senior, resource rich, worldly, and experienced brothers in the afrosphere"
I wouldn't say that, especially with Bro. Makheru in the mix.
All this self aggrandizement is nauseating
"Since it is difficult to know everything before drawing a conclusion, deductive reasoning has little use in the real world."
Hand clap, hand clap!!
I'm finding that more and more people are imprisoned by their limited 'way' of thinking. It's almost as if this 'system' has ALL that power, then it surely has the power to retard one's ability to think outside of it.
"...and don't acknowledge the victories that actually happened ..." - "But I have yet to hear from you that David ever beat Goliath."
Head nod, head nod!!
Sheeeit, there are battles as we speak where David is beating Blackwater, ehem, I mean Goliath. LOL What if we focused on every black center of empowerment in America that was demolished by say, the construction of I-75, and say let's do that again. There are threads there that should be revived and Bill Cosby going on "Meet the Press" ain't gone do it!!
"A better use of the mighty intellects who have been engaged in this exchange would be the creation and perpetuation of memes/myths that EMPOWER people."
Foot stomp, foot stomp!! Feed people, nothing else really matters.
"You and DV are the most senior, resource rich, worldly, and experienced brothers in the afrosphere..."
Cosign, cosign!!
You go humble Fisher, you go swagger DV. The observation/compliment is what it is, not a pick apart line to find where we may have ommitted others and certainly not a tool of aggrandizement. That in and of itself may be the 'meme' or 'system nuetralizer' we need to get poppin so that this ritual of back and forth is stunted.
This is the type of stuff that gets me juiced (LOL, all you Barry haters suck on that one) about the future...unfortunately, I suspect the hypnotic back-and-forth will commence.
Prove me wrong somebody!!
Oops, that above comment was me.
Just to keep the thread going...
:)
mjb, what the f*ck did you just say? Please break this stuff down so even I can understand it.
Damn, was I that senseless?!?
This is the type of shit that keeps a lot of folks out of the conversation.
Proceed...
"The observation/compliment is what it is, not a pick apart line to find where we may have ommitted others and certainly not a tool of aggrandizement. That in and of itself may be the 'meme' or 'system nuetralizer' we need to get poppin so that this ritual of back and forth is stunted." MJB
Astute, intellectually aggressive, and potentially empowering observation.
DV...
"Astute, intellectually aggressive, and potentially empowering observation."
Yada, yada, yada, yada. Stop appealing to people's vanity and make a cogent, logical argument.
mjb...
"This is the type of shit that keeps a lot of folks out of the conversation."
I'm not trying to keep you out of the conversation. To the contrary. I just sincerely do not understand what you said.
So break it down for my fifth grade level mind, please.
Seriously.
Michael Fisher said...
Stop appealing to people's vanity and make a cogent, logical argument.
You mean like you? OK.
What is "argument"?
What "color" are the people to whoms vanity I appeal?
Who invented the word "cogent"?
Fish, your entire "Global System of White Supremacy" panders to the vanity of weak minded non-whites eager to bite into the poison apple of perpetual self-righteous victim status.
One thing I'm noticing is that I'll be able to cut and paste my responses to this particular issue soon. That is assuming I could compile them all in one place from all the different places this point of contention has bloomed. Here's the latest installment.
When you finally run out of logical or semi-rational arguments against the very existence of a GSWS and against any attempt at identification and recognition of the same, it always always always turns the same way. The old "what have you done for me lately" argument, often buttresed by the "what's the solution then" paradox. At least this time it's taking somewhat of a new flavor here in that it is not necessarily being envoked to denounce the GSWS, simply to suggest that our efforts could be better applied to formulation of solutions and remedies, action points and campaigns.
The problem with that is something I have mentioned before. You can't solve a problem you don't understand. You can often fashion what appear to be solutions to some of the superficial manifestations of the problem, but they will usually have little or no macro effect.
DV has suggested we build a better plantation. Without knowing more about his real ideas, this one disturbs me because a better plantation implies that there will be some slaves somewhere. Part of what we need to understand about the problem is that the current plantation system is dysfuntional and quite possibly suicidal; it doesn't make much sense to fashion our plans for a better world from the same flawed schematic.
As tedious as some of this discourse may be, it is invaluable and needed to ultimately get to the point where we can work together on a program that actually has a chance for lasting success.
(a) "What is "argument"?
argument
Noun
* S: (n) argument, statement (a fact or assertion offered as evidence that something is true) "it was a strong argument that his hypothesis was true"
* S: (n) controversy, contention, contestation, disputation, disceptation, tilt, argument, arguing (a contentious speech act; a dispute where there is strong disagreement) "they were involved in a violent argument"
* S: (n) argument, argumentation, debate (a discussion in which reasons are advanced for and against some proposition or proposal) "the argument over foreign aid goes on and on"
* S: (n) argument, literary argument (a summary of the subject or plot of a literary work or play or movie) "the editor added the argument to the poem"
* S: (n) argument, parameter ((computer science) a reference or value that is passed to a function, procedure, subroutine, command, or program)
* S: (n) argument (a variable in a logical or mathematical expression whose value determines the dependent variable; if f(x)=y, x is the independent variable)
* S: (n) argumentation, logical argument, argument, line of reasoning, line (a course of reasoning aimed at demonstrating a truth or falsehood; the methodical process of logical reasoning) "I can't follow your line of reasoning"
(b) "What "color" are the people to whoms (sic) vanity I appeal?"
I don't know.
(c) Who invented the word "cogent"?
I don't know
Post a Comment