en-us https://www.intensedebate.com/users/758925 Comments by tee_drews https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-people-who-can-only-afford-hard-work__trashed/#IDComment70066963 In America, we tend to firmly believe in the idea that everyone has the ability to get ahead in life with just a little hard work. However, what people fail to realize, is that there will always be distinctions and different classifications so if everyone were to simply “work hard” those that get ahead would get ahead for different reasons. In class, Sam talked about how there was a starting line for the different races. There are many historical reasons why the starting line is not even or equal for everyone it is just how things are. If for example, the whites were at one specific place to begin because they already have many resources, connections, money, whatever the reason may be, everyone else has to start at a place not as advanced as where the whites started. Blacks were held back for so many years and made to feel less than people, so when the time came and they were allowed to simply live, and make it they faced challenges that white people never had to face simply because of the skin in which they were born in. So, they would have to start the race further back and away from where the whites would begin. Immigrants are people migrating from many different parts of the world. They are new to the country filled with many people already struggling. They have more to deal with such as language barriers, culture differences, and family issues. All of their hope lies in the simple trip to America. Many travel and leave everything that they have so that they could begin a new and improved life. Their optimistic outlook could possibly be an edge up on the competition; they are not afraid of working for everything that they have, they are actually most likely used to it. Whereas unemployed Americans feel like they’re too good to do the very basic labor positions, be it too large an ego, too much pride, or plain laziness they would rather collect unemployment checks then work. With that in mind, and with everyone having so much of a head-start, hard work alone cannot fix the gap. Therefore, in my opinion I feel like immigrants with money have a much better chance at making it and living the American dream than those that do not have it. A quick substitute for money could be whatever type of skills or abilities that they may have. They might not have money but they could help you make some. Americans do not want more people feeding out of the pot than they have adding to it. It is just that simple. If they do not benefit in some way, why even consider it? Sat, 24 Apr 2010 02:36:22 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/what-about-people-who-can-only-afford-hard-work__trashed/#IDComment70066963 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68472065 I really enjoyed the lecture. I pride myself in being able to usually see the big picture on different issues but I do not think I ever sat and really thought about how the people living in the Middle East thought about the war. Yeah, there are many people here against the war, all that it has caused, the billions of dollars spent nursing it, and the many American casualties, but all of them reasons are selfish. I doubt they ever wondered about the little children dying and the houses being blown away. I liked how in this lecture, we were told to think of ourselves as them; we had to imagine and put ourselves in their shoes. It is a different outlook when you look at things in their perspective. I mean it is not hard really because they are not unlike us. They want the same things as everyone else, why should not they get it, only because the people in power there are corrupt and allow things like that to happen. All they want is happiness, peace, and a normal life. Instead they have to wake up to the enemy in their backyards. They have to loot, and then get the only possessions that they do have ruined because looting is illegal and wrong. How would I feel, I would be enraged. They, those Americans, have no right coming into my country trying to use all of our resources. They have no right starting and extending a war because they want our oil. How is that in any way right? Yeah I harbor some animosity because my neighbors and family members are dying. No I do not like the soldiers because they are helping to destroy my home, all that I worked for to build. It is not right. And to think that they are all Christians. What is this a Christian invasion? Are they trying to get rid of all of the Muslims? Why can not I live without worrying about all of this? This is a constant battle that I always have to fight day in and out. I did not choose this lifestyle, nor do I wish for it to continue this way. I wish it were to end. I bet Americans do not have to worry about this everyday; they are free to live their lives. They get sheltered from what really goes down here. Yeah the soldiers give the children candy, but does that compensate for their brothers, fathers and mothers dying? 29 of our family and friends can die for just one bad guy to die? What does that really mean? How much value is my life worth? I wish this would end. I do not want to join the insurgent movement and fight back; I just want to live a normal life. That is all. Hopefully someone somewhere gets the message. Oh and take a picture of me, my gift from me to you. Sat, 17 Apr 2010 07:55:33 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68472065 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68472097 I really enjoyed the lecture. I pride myself in being able to usually see the big picture on different issues but I do not think I ever sat and really thought about how the people living in the Middle East thought about the war. Yeah, there are many people here against the war, all that it has caused, the billions of dollars spent nursing it, and the many American casualties, but all of them reasons are selfish. I doubt they ever wondered about the little children dying and the houses being blown away. I liked how in this lecture, we were told to think of ourselves as them; we had to imagine and put ourselves in their shoes. It is a different outlook when you look at things in their perspective. I mean it is not hard really because they are not unlike us. They want the same things as everyone else, why should not they get it, only because the people in power there are corrupt and allow things like that to happen. All they want is happiness, peace, and a normal life. Instead they have to wake up to the enemy in their backyards. They have to loot, and then get the only possessions that they do have ruined because looting is illegal and wrong. How would I feel, I would be enraged. They, those Americans, have no right coming into my country trying to use all of our resources. They have no right starting and extending a war because they want our oil. How is that in any way right? Yeah I harbor some animosity because my neighbors and family members are dying. No I do not like the soldiers because they are helping to destroy my home, all that I worked for to build. It is not right. And to think that they are all Christians. What is this a Christian invasion? Are they trying to get rid of all of the Muslims? Why can not I live without worrying about all of this? This is a constant battle that I always have to fight day in and out. I did not choose this lifestyle, nor do I wish for it to continue this way. I wish it were to end. I bet Americans do not have to worry about this everyday; they are free to live their lives. They get sheltered from what really goes down here. Yeah the soldiers give the children candy, but does that compensate for their brothers, fathers and mothers dying? 29 of our family and friends can die for just one bad guy to die? What does that really mean? How much value is my life worth? I wish this would end. I do not want to join the insurgent movement and fight back; I just want to live a normal life. That is all. Hopefully someone somewhere gets the message. Oh and take a picture of me, my gift from me to you. Sat, 17 Apr 2010 03:55:33 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/christian-invaders-the-turnaround__trashed/#IDComment68472097 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66742031 There were two questions posed: Did anything Sam said make me change my stance on things, or did anything make a difference to me. Overall, the class has had an effect on how I view matters of race relations and of people in general. I would not say that they caused me to change my opinion because my opinion more or less was reassured by most of the things that he has said. I naturally exist in between on most issues. Not to say that I am undecided or that I do not have an opinion, I just believe that I have the ability to argue both sides because the strengths and weaknesses of both arguments are easily apparent to me. In other words, I try to understand where people are coming from, motivations, etc. that may affect decisions that they make. This is what I have come to realize to be the best way to look at things and this class and all of Sam’s ranting about various topics just helped me see that this is the best way to approach situations, especially those issues involving race relations. So, to answer the first question, I would have to say no. There was nothing that made me change my view on things. This could be the direct correlation to my African American identity and minority status. I was forced to see things the way that I do at a young age. I didn’t have the rose-colored glasses or even a silver spoon that the majority tends to enjoy. I have learned that I can never say that I know how it is to be white, or that I can identify with the issues that they may face because I was never white and I can never be white. There were several things that made a difference to me and had me thinking and reevaluating things in my life. I’m not going to sit here and say that I will change how I live each day dramatically, but I know for sure that I’ll think about things more. For example, I love chocolate. Today in class he showed the video depicting slaves on the Ivory Coast forced to harvest cocoa. It was astonishing to me to learn that there is some slave labor during the production of the chocolate I have grown to love. One of the slaves were interviewed and asked what he would say to someone like me and he said that he would not say nice things and that he suffered for me to eat a piece of candy. He would tell me that I was eating his flesh. That is very disturbing. I know that it would be very difficult to give it up, but should I? Is it my fault for liking and supporting a snack that I like? So yeah, I’ll face internal dilemmas every time I eat chocolate, but I doubt that I would discontinue eating it. This may be morally wrong, but one person won’t stop the slave production, but this huge decision could alter my life. It may not be a big deal to others, but chocolate has been apart of my life for as long as I can remember. In essence, it may have not altered my behavior, but my overall opinion has been altered. Isn’t that what he set out to do? In my opinion, Sam has succeeded. I’ll think about the flesh of the slave every time I eat my Reese’s. Fri, 9 Apr 2010 06:35:40 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/04/i-really-want-to-know-also__trashed/#IDComment66742031 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/those-damn-dolls__trashed/#IDComment64286442 I saw this video a good while ago when I was still in high school. It was a huge thing in my inner circle of family and friends. Everyone expressed disdain and were so appalled by the actions of these little children, as they forwarded the video via emails. No one could fathom why these children were revealing those inner-most thoughts and feelings we try to suppress. Sam said something interesting, those children do not stay young forever; they grow up and assimilate into the society we know today, but where does those feelings go? Of course they become educated, some at least, and various views are bound to change about various subjects, but for the most part, they remain. They remain hidden beneath our layers of life. Our very existence is a build-up of experiences, thoughts, and actions. Do we have a choice in the matter? Sometimes we do, but others are just so deeply rooted in us and in our very being that we have no choice. Our rights have been violated, because at a very young age we have been given prejudices and thoughts on how to “survive” in a world by our very own parents. They stripped us of our innocence in the world of race relations. Is it wrong? To some degree, this could be argued in the affirmative, but how else would one explain the physical differences one is bound to discover in pre-school? Parents are supposed to protect us from the dangers of the world, why is it even questioned? Like with anything, there is always a limit to what information is too much. For example, Sam also showed the video of the white family that raised their children as white supremacists. The mother said that if she were very deeply rooted in Christianity she would have raised her children as such. My question then is, are parents just continuing the cycle? Or is it a method to their madness? I found the video to be very disturbing. Initially I actually agreed with what the older girls were saying. There always will be a division among any group of people. With African Americans it’s the light-skinned people vs. the dark-skinned people. With white people, although I’m not an expert because I’m not white and I don’t know how it is to be white, I would say the division would be between the blonde-haired blue eyed people and the others. There’s always a division, wherever that line may be. The girls in the video expressed hatred for the division and what they considered beautiful in the African American community. It really hit home as I found myself relating to some of the views. I know people that would only talk to light-skinned people because they feel as though they are prettier. Or if they did date someone dark-skinned they would say you are pretty, but not without adding “for a dark-skinned girl”. It is a shame because these girls are growing up hating the skin that they are in as they crave the attention of potential mates. They want to be looked at in the same way. Everyone wants to be an equal but there are so many levels in which everyone is not. It’s one thing to be observe racism amongst the different races, but for it to be an issue within the race itself, that is just problematic. You cannot expect to win a war against the opponent when all of your energy is spent fighting your own soldiers. To tie all this back to the video, children only know what they see and hear. They are like sponges, especially at such young ages. So, if on the news following their all white educational shows, all they see is blacks getting arrested and causing havoc, they think that that’s how it is with all blacks. They must have been “bad” if they’re getting lock-up, right? All my friends at school always get in trouble and they happen to look like me. On tv, I never see Hannah Montana acting like that. So does that mean she’s nice or better simply because she’s white? My mom said all our problems in the world stem from the white man, should I believe her? Children are the best example of how and where society stands, they say everything that the adults choose to hide. They reveal those innermost thoughts that life forces us to suppress. This video, although horrifying as an African American, just proves that we still have a long way to go. Sat, 27 Mar 2010 02:42:07 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/03/those-damn-dolls__trashed/#IDComment64286442 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/who-could-compete-with-this-woman-on-a-level-playing-field__trashed/#IDComment58903347 "With a little push, how useful would we be," the prime minister said this and it actually leads me to wonder. He makes a great point though, because sometimes that is all someone needs to prosper. If you are not born into a life that does not require a "push", then one is necessary in order to get past the current conditions. Throughout all of the third world countries, where money is indeed an issue, they never get that extra push. They could be born with all of the intelligence and skills required to do all that we take for granted here in America. They are not able to make use of them because they have to worry about things like hunger and shelter every hour of their lives. This painstaking truth is critical. With little to no formal education they remain stuck in the cycle. How does one escape? They did not ask to be born into a society so bad off. This Haitian woman flipped the script though. With only a 5th grade education, and the tarnished dream, she made a way to survive. She created a lucrative business that the average American would not be able to do in similar circumstances. She borrows money from a local bank, travels to the Dominican Republic, loans her goods, and collects her money 2 weeks later. She created a small scale wholesale industry that was destroyed only because of the earthquake. Our companies go under and borrow from the government when there's only a slight decline in economic activities. These same people have graduated college with multiple degrees. If the roles were reversed, would the situation be different? I found Sam's outlook to be particularly interesting. There are hundreds of college students majoring in business, including those here at PennState. They will get the top executive positions partly because they were qualified and that they exemplified potential and intelligence. The other reason, would be because they were born here in America. They were given the opportunity to learn the material and skills necessary for business. They were trained by experts in the field, therefore they are picked amongst these companies based on the preparation received and how well they were able to retain the information and apply it to real-life situations. These less fortunate people were not given this opportunity. This does not mean that they would not have the same, if not better ability to retain and utilize the information presented to them, but that they simply do not have the same resources. What happens if they were given the same chances? The world would be way different, and the competition fierce. Would it really be in America's best interest to help them even the playing field? Exactly, NO! The lazy, wealthy people of America would actually have to do something to remain wealthy, and who wants that? Sat, 27 Feb 2010 01:56:22 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/who-could-compete-with-this-woman-on-a-level-playing-field__trashed/#IDComment58903347 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/swinging-past-the-other-end-of-the-ideological-spectrum-on-the-way-to-the-intellectual-gray__trashed/#IDComment56597730 I found the lecture to be extremely interesting. It really hit home, especially since I agreed with everything that Sam was saying. I understand that there are always multiple perspectives on any one situation and that there are always many different ways that you can spin something. He stressed the whole “freedom” idea about everyone’s freedom of choice and how everyone has the ability to make certain choices that can have severe impacts on a person’s life. He mentioned the contrasting “determinist’s” idea as well. This side suggested that there were circumstances and factors out of some people’s control that somehow prevent them from getting to the places in life that they would rather be. Then there was the sociology interpretation, which was essentially a hybrid of both ideas. I identified with this way of thinking the most. I do not tend to think with one extreme in mind, instead with the overall understanding that there will always be a mixture of both concepts present. So, for him to express how I already felt, was great. You said that “If everyone were living in the middle then everybody would be living the same life”, I disagree with this entire sentiment. What makes you think that everyone’s “middle” is the same? Everyone has different thoughts, morals, ideals, and extremes so therefore there will always be debates about where the middle ground should be. No one will have the same analyses of circumstances and events happening to people out of their control and therefore will make different assumptions about what choices and opportunities that are available to them. This “grey” area will always be different from person to person and as a result, the way that people perceive certain predicaments will always be varied. Therefore, it is safe to assume that people will NOT be the same if everyone were to think in the middle of both extreme view points because everyone’s middle is up for interpretation. In addition, the middle is more of a mindset than a particular situation. There will always be inevitable differences in each person’s mindset. With so many variations in where the “top” of the mountain may be to each person, and with the knowledge that everyone is going to react differently to certain situations, it is hardly logical to conclude that there could ever even be a set “middle”. This would be almost impossible to achieve. For example, while you are given credit cards to spend on whatever you wish, there are many other people that are not given anything and are forced to struggle for everything that they have. I know it was not your decision to be born into such wealth, but at the same time, it was not their decision to be born into the life that they live either. Circumstances beyond their control; like Sam said, some people just get luck on their side. So who are we to judge them as though everyone has had the same obstacles, struggles, journey, or whatever euphemism you want to call it, when clearly there just isn’t an equal playing field? This is not an excuse for those that would rather be lazy and choose to blame everyone else for why they aren’t progressing in life; but it is an explanation for those of us that have to struggle to make do. You may have the opportunity to skate on by, but just keep in mind that for others, that opportunity will never be made available to them. That’s just how society is; is it right? No, but if those of us “choose” to succeed, there’s no obstacle that can deter us from that dream. Sat, 13 Feb 2010 04:55:03 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/swinging-past-the-other-end-of-the-ideological-spectrum-on-the-way-to-the-intellectual-gray__trashed/#IDComment56597730 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/negros-of-the-world-unite__trashed/#IDComment55571721 If this were an ideal world that relied on wishful thinking without any regards to race and/or categories identifying groups of people, I would totally agree with what you are saying. Of course everyone, well most of us, would love to live in a world that thought of everyone as individuals before they thought of the group, but we do not live in that type of society. I find it rather ironic how the majority of people would agree to do without the labels, yet collectively we are still at square one. I guess what I am trying to say is that this "evolution" process does not happen overnight, it will take generations to fix just as it took generations to produce. It just simply is not plausible. We are still entirely too close to the whole civil rights era of the 1960's where affirmative action and quotas were introduced. How does one keep track of minority representation in corporations, leadership positions, and businesses if those distinct categories were never created or upheld for that matter? The government is still dependent on these labels. It would not be possible to prevent discrimination at the workplace, for example, if it were not for various laws and amendments. They are crucial to the continued civil rights initiatives. So, therefore the labels must remain on the census for people to be able to identify with. Do I think the word "negro" should be replaced with a more advanced term? No, not necessarily. I do not feel as though the term is insensitive or offensive. Blacks called themselves negro in the past and it does not have connotations that are derogatory. It does remind us of a time when public buildings were segregated, but I do not think it is necessary to totally disregard the word because it brings back sorrowful memories. To accurately get a sense of who and where certain ethnicities and races are located the names of these ought to be clearly identified. With people being used to and identifying with the variations in names that basically have the same meaning, there should also be words on the census that reflect that. So, I believe that the census is actually right to include negro at least for the older generation that still considers themselves one. I applaud them for making corrections to the previous ones as individuality becomes more meaningful to society. They allowed for biracial people to check multiple boxes so that they would not be forced to pick a side. This shows that they are indeed aiming to make progress towards a better and unique classification of the human race as we all can agree should happen anyway. Eventually, like the article predicted, outdated terms like "negro" will be eliminated forever. Perhaps we can wish for other changes as well such as the elimination of those classification altogether in the near future. One can only hope. Sat, 6 Feb 2010 04:45:51 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/02/negros-of-the-world-unite__trashed/#IDComment55571721 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434701 continued..... Police do not even know how they would be able to enforce these laws. I have a feeling that there will be some french "revoloution" that parallels that of the united states. A woman wearing a veil would try to get on the bus, be denied admission, and start a whole movement. Is this necessary, shouldn't we be able to learn from the past without having to repeat history? Long story short, a ban of this type is unethical, impractical, and contradictory. BAN the ban!!! lol Sat, 30 Jan 2010 03:00:28 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434701 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434640 continued.... They do not know the mentality associated with the religion, and therefore cannot see the logic behind these practices. The french government is in fact doing what they set out to avoid. Supposedly, they were being "heroic" in preventing male empowerment of some sort, by denying them that subtle power to coerce women into these inferior roles. The contradiction arises however, because now you cannot say that it is the men, or Islam that denies these women freedom, but instead the law. In what way does this seem logical? Lawmakers said that this "choice" is not compatible to the public; how does one determine this fact? Sure there are polls, but if everyone is taught to speak politically correct, no one ever knows what someone, or how the "public" really feels. Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:59:48 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434640 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434576 continued...... The issue is not whether muslims should be allowed to wear them in public or not, but more so whether french leaders should have the authority to deny them that right. I do not see the relevance that this has to the french government. Wearing the veils do not pose any threats to the government and they do not harm anyone, so I don't see why this is such a big deal? They tried to say that this is another form of oppression for women because women were forced to wear the veils by their brothers and husbands, but most actually wear them as a result of a personal choice. They would rather live pious lives, why should covering one's body such as this be questioned when the alternative is allowing too much exposure? How does this make sense at all? Everyone always form opinions about situations that they are in no way affiliated with. It is difficult to see where people like the women in the video are coming from when they are not used to the culture. Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:59:00 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434576 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434459 I definitely agree with what you are saying. The whole French enlightenment idea contradicts the purpose of an enlightenment to begin with. Like you said, ideally it should instead lift the spirits of its citizens and hopefully give them a reason to be more comfortable in their own skin, instead it makes them look like an outcast in their own clothes. The film said, "Critics say it's like using a cannon to swat a fly." If you believe that the government does have the right to suppress individual rights that denies people the ability to express one's self, then this analogy further negates the ban. It is basically saying that even IF it is more efficient to discourage full veils in public facilities like buses and schools that maybe a ban is just too extreme. Islam and muslims are already cast in a negative way in the media and this current debate does little to change things. Sat, 30 Jan 2010 02:57:40 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/the-enlightened-west-knows-best__trashed/#IDComment54434459 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/last-name-begins-with-a-e-g-brian-anderson__trashed/#IDComment53880397 yooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Tue, 26 Jan 2010 02:58:30 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/last-name-begins-with-a-e-g-brian-anderson__trashed/#IDComment53880397 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/is-that-negro-or-negra-harry__trashed/#IDComment53131204 (PART 3) I was able to deduce from Reid’s comment that if Barack Obama did not have “light skin” or was not skilled at oratory, that he felt as though Obama would not have succeeded as a candidate. Eloquence is necessary for presidency, intelligence should be mandatory; however, it often gets sidelined. George Bush was able to speak well also, but the objective is not only to get the message across, but to have a meaningful message. Not once did he address this “shade” of Obama; the side that actually won him the election. Americans were tired of the Bush administration and wanted a new perspective. The culture that Obama comes from may have enhanced this perspective, but it is not the only means in which it was acquired. Need I mention, Harvard Law School? Harry Reid needed to be reprimanded for his ignorance, case closed. This is issue did not arise when Don Imus said his "Nappy headed ho" segment. The message ought to be made clear: it is never acceptable to tolerate lack of awareness. Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:47:28 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/is-that-negro-or-negra-harry__trashed/#IDComment53131204 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/is-that-negro-or-negra-harry__trashed/#IDComment53131098 (PART 2) In addition, there are certain things that public figures are not allowed to do. More specifically, “elected” officials such as Harry Reid are expected to act professionally especially when addressing the media and the public. The comment he made was not an intelligent approach to the message that he was trying to convey. If, in fact, he does feel this way and about the black person’s ability to compete in an election, it should not have been stated where everyone can have access to it. It is not acceptable to cling to old perceptions and stereotypes and if constituents were to ignore this blatant disrespect, then they would therefore be allowing the country’s progress to cease. It is impossible to advance if statements and beliefs such as these continue to hold us back. Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:45:48 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/is-that-negro-or-negra-harry__trashed/#IDComment53131098 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/is-that-negro-or-negra-harry__trashed/#IDComment53131034 (PART 1) After reading this, I found myself unable to by-pass the word “elected” official repeated throughout the text; the key to deciding whether or not this extra attention is even necessary. Although you may think that his words were not insensitive and you were able to offer a generational rationale, this still does not excuse the fact that the words were indeed said and were inappropriate. The “sensitivity” is not the issue in my opinion; instead the issue relies on him having the audacity to say such things. Of course you pointed out that he is amongst the older generation because of certain terms used, but should someone’s age be able to justify ignorance? Previously, age was thought to bring wisdom, or at least more; when did decades of life reduce itself to simply becoming a defense for adhering to aged ideals? He lives in today’s world where terms like “negro” are only reserved in textbooks and classrooms. It is merely a tool utilized so that people can understand the history and severity involved in using a single word like “negro”. Thu, 21 Jan 2010 06:44:56 +0000 https://www.racerelationsproject.org/2010/01/is-that-negro-or-negra-harry__trashed/#IDComment53131034