If MLK were alive today, this is about what would happen.
Sort of offensive
*snip*
EDIT: Fuck it I'm just gonna embed the video.
Mod edit: Please don't embed videos like that. Especially one already posted on p1
If MLK were alive today, this is about what would happen.
Sort of offensive
*snip*
EDIT: Fuck it I'm just gonna embed the video.
Mod edit: Please don't embed videos like that. Especially one already posted on p1
Last edited by Anakso; 2012-11-21 at 02:58 AM.
I'd definitely say he'd be disappointed in the common place use of racial stereotypes he was trying to get rid of, but I'm almost positive that'd be overshadowed by people like Obama as president, and Morgan Freeman being one of the most amazing actors ever
Racism still exists but it's way way way way less than in his time and isn't openly accepted any more so I'm pretty sure he'd be happy about that.
You should get your facts straight first (and learn how companies work and why a CEO can't just raise his salary all by himself). Claiming that they close because of raising a CEO's salary is completely wrong if you bother to check their annual overall costs. That raise looks like a joke compared to that. Not to mention that they already filed for bankruptcy way before that. You felt for the anti-capitalist propaganda from the economic illiterates that we call liberals.
Hes really not a very eloquent person, he rambled on there and said very little. In the end if he didn't care about the words use, only the intention assumed with its use then he should have no problem with a white guy callin him 'nigga'. I'd like to see some stupid wigger go up to em and start callin him that a bunch and see just how 'cool with it' he really is.
I mean really..hes bascilly creating a completely false argument to justify its use. Hes claiming that when a young black man calls his friend 'nigga' hes not saying the same thing the slave owner was saying when he yelled 'hey nigger come here', when in fact hes saying EXACTLY the same thing. The word 'nigger' wasn't negatively connotated either, it was just the word used to describe a persons racial background. It was slang, but it wasn't intended to be MEAN it was just a simple label. It meant 'that's a person of African descent'. Literally...that was it. Now, how are the kids using the word 'nigga' today?? EXACTLY THE SAME WAY. The word 'nigger' took on a dark meaning when racist white folks started to connotate is as negative, and the black folks of course took offense to it being said as if being a nigger was a bad thing.
Compare the word 'nigger' or 'nigga' ( don't try to separate the two its bullshit to say there is any difference we ALL know what your saying when you say 'nigga' ) to the swastika. Both have origins that were non nefarious, both were twisted terribly and used as symbols of hate. Now, how many of you see Jews walkin around with slightly modified swastikas on their clothes, or tattooed on em, or used somehow publicly. Can you imagine that? It would be pretty obnoxious wouldn't it? Even if the person of Jewish descent were to convert to Buddhism and use the symbol for its original meaning, wouldn't you still think hes a skinhead before you think hes a Buddhist?
He would be proud of how the country has changed, and ashamed of Black America.
The bakers union fucked over Hostess, get your facts right.
They had a chance to fight the changes and didn't say a word, then when it came time to make the changes they went on strike, then refused to even consider any cooperation when they knew the alternative was to go under.
Hostess literally told them 'look you either accept some changes or you lose all your jobs tomorrow' and the union said, 'oh well'.
Does that sound like a group that values their job, or one that worries about surviving? Sounds to me like people who want the company to go under because the union leaders have parachutes, and the members know the government will take care of them till they find another job.
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/201...ses/?mobile=nc
Furthermore, Hostess filed for bankruptcy in January, its second trip to bankruptcy court since 2004. It previously emerged from restructuring in 2009 after a four-and-a-half year process. (Source) Please explain how poor management of the company is the fault of the union.
Intent makes up a large part in how words are interpreted. The difference is vast. Are you personally offended when people use these words, or are you taking offense on behalf of black people?
Last edited by Longview; 2012-11-21 at 03:52 AM.
I'm well aware of that, the company has had issues, probably because they sell junk food and people have been reducing the amount of that stuff they eat for a while now. Certainly there was some miss management, but the future of the 18,000 jobs are what matters to the union. No one can go back in time to fix management errors. They can however do the best they can to save jobs, especially in the terrible economy atm. But no.. the union would rather see the company go under then make concessions. Its a bad situation, but wouldn't you rather keep the job with reduced benefits while you look for a new job?
To be honest, from my personal perspective I just tired of having double standards. I have no interest or desire to use either of those words, I get tired of hearing them all the time and then hearing about how my being white means I'm inherently racist and deserve to pay for the sins of my forefathers. [/QUOTE]
"Hostess sales declined as consumers in the 1980s and '90s shied away from carbohydrate villains like snack cakes and white bread. Attempts to come up with new products didn't pan out. It didn't help that the company had roughly $450 million in debt by 2004. In September of that year, Hostess declared bankruptcy."
""The industry has overcapacity. We're overcapacity. Our rivals are overcapacity," said Rayburn"(Source)
"...the company, pumped full of debt by private equity buyouts..."
(Source)
"A crushing amount debt—more than $1 billion—had already forced the Irving, Texas company back into bankruptcy court for the second time in a decade"
(Source)
A strike did not cause the problems which Hostess faced, including the rising cost of raw materials and the shrinking (and severely oversupplied) marketplace.
Rayburn said in September:
"Gregory Rayburn, a restructuring professional who took the helm of iconic baking company earlier this year, said that a contingency plan is already in place to shut down operations and sell the company’s brands, plants and other assets if members of its two biggest unions don’t ratify the new contracts."
The company, from the beginning, was ready to immediately liquidate and blame unions for not accepting a terrible deal.
The awful business decisions which have lead Hostess to declare bankruptcy in the past, past buyouts and profits-first restructuring meant to punish workers as much as possible - those did not help, either.
It's the unions.
Yeah.
What double standards? RZA did mean that the word had transcended, and these days is used almost exclusively as an inherently positive word. In the video clip I linked in the original post, he also claims to use these words with his lawyer, whom also uses them with RZA. Additionally, he claims to have no issue with white people using the word. I am not saying you are wrong, I just think it's really silly how you choose to go out of your way to argue against the usage of a word you do not use, that described a group of people which you are not a part of - hundreds of years ago.
I like to think that he would be proud of some of the strides we have made.
I also personally believe that he would be appalled at the fact that the NAACP is more or less MEMEME organization for blacks as opposed to the advancement of all minorities.
I am sure he would be proud of the fact that we have evolved enough as a nation to elect a black president.
While a good idea at the time I feel he would at this time be against affirmative action as it exists today.