No, those things didn't happen even during Jim Crow era. Sure, some...but not many. They wanted their money. So they put them in other places.
Very few had the "No Negroes" and "No Irish" signs.
There's the problem: they wouldn't be violations.
So you'd rather live in a country where your drinks and food get spit in or pubes get put in them because they are racist but don't advertise it? I'd rather avoid those places.
I don't. I prefer the freedom and options to vote with my money and social media. I can't do that, now. Not readily. I don't like these secret racists. Let them come out.
Oh, you mean exactly like how it is in Japan where they won't feed white "Gajins" and turn them away?
That's simply not true ^^^, federal laws had to be passed to force the entire south to accommodate black people.
And many times it wasn't even the businesses fault. They wouldn't serve black people because if they did, their other white customers would no longer come
Why wouldn't they be violations? Because they aren't seen as such in the country? I think all of the human rights councils of the world would likely disagree.
The spitting in the burger stuff, okay, so is that pure conjecture? You say that stuff happening in the Jim Crow era is exaggerated, and then rely on pure hearsay and conjecture to prove a point? Doesn't seem like a good tactic to me.
Like I say, I get your overall point, and it'd be great if it could work that way. But if racism is seen as a totally fine thing to practice, it'll never go away, and it would only enhance cultural and social separation and create areas where racism is seen as the norm and as a totally fine thing, and not the excuse to treat people like shit for no reason that it actually is.
So only the South had to be forced to accommodate black people?
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Point is, they still get a shitload of tourists "just passing through." It's obviously no where even close to as bad as you think it is. So what? Go somewhere else. Spend your money at another place that is not shitty.
Right, I did talk about that: they existed. But they were rare. They still want money.
You're correct. Not violations. Not human rights violations. Unless you want to say the UN is cracking down on Japan?
No, not pure conjecture. Talk to any well-traveled black man. Probably any will do. They will have at least one story to share with you. Out of the millions of encounters, there's at least one racist story to share. It's too bad that you dismiss real discrimination, though. It sucks that you prefer silent abuses over making known who is racist.
If what you said was correct, then racism would have gone away. Here's the problem: humans are naturally racist. This has been studied long enough that it's fairly obvious we're just doomed to always be racist. It has to be trained out of us. Unless we modify the tribalism out of our genes.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
I do see a lot of your points, and agree a fair bit, to be honest. I think the sad part is that although I do not think things would work in your scenario, I also don't think things are working as they are now. Trading in one shit world for another seems like another chain in a cycle of awfulness. I don't really know which I'd prefer, because I speak from a position of privilege and have not experienced racism towards me since I left secondary (read: high) school. From an attempted 'objective' view: secret racism or up-front racism, which do I prefer? I don't know, they both sound shit.
You're running away because you know that the South isn't the only part of the country that needed to be forced to accept black people, you're just not man enough to admit it.
Keep being a bigot.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
What's not true, the fact that "No Negroes" and "No Irish" signs were very rare even during the racist of racism times? Because what I said is true. Are you familiar with Jim Crow laws? No, I am not being condescending. Many cofuse what they were.
And look at how forcing desegregation has worked out for us! Schools seem more segregated than ever, right?
He is a massive bigot and didn't like that I was pointing it out.
__________________ posted by Badabing
I don't know why some of you are going on about being right and winning. Rob and Impediment were in on this gag because I PMed them. Silent and Rao PMed me and figured I changed the post. I highly doubt anybody thought Quan made the post, but simply played along just for the lulz.
Gender: Male Location: The Proud Nation of Kekistan
Yeah as if letting people who do commissioned expressive works choose not to perform acts of artistic expression they do not agree with is going to return us to the time of Jim Crow and make black people starve to death.
__________________
Shadilay my brothers and sisters. With any luck we will throw off the shackles of normie oppression. We have nothing to lose but our chains! Praise Kek!
THE MOTTO IS "IN KEK WE TRUST"
Whether Jim Crow laws would come back isn't relevant. The principle remains the same. If it was ok to prevent businesses from discriminating against black people, why isn't it ok to stop them from discriminating against gays?
That's cause we stopped. When we were implementing integration, both the scores of white and black kids improved. However white families not wanting black kids to go to their school pressured the government to stop integration anyway. The government gave in to that race-motivated pressure, and here we are today.
On the topic of cakes and other baked goodies, I'm inclined to support the idea of refusing a service based on an opposition to the message. For example if an alt-brony wanted me to make them a swastika cake, or a member of the Westboro bapist church a "god hates f*gs cake", I'd like to be allowed tell them to f*ck off.
On the other hand that's because those messages encourage discriminatory and hateful practices, not because they support extending the institution of marriage to gay people. I feel as if somewhere we need to draw a line around what is acceptable and not acceptable to refuse.
KMC Community Forums
Dec 6th, 2017 04:09 AM
