Even a movie about tennis doesn't waste any time in lecturing us about racism
They simply HAD to feature Richard whining about KKK going after him 50 years ago several times in the movie about tennis.
shareComplaining about the KKK is much better than pretending they did not exist and were the scourge of the country.
shareThis isn't a movie about KKK. It wouldn't be pretending they didn't exist.
shareSo when is it okay to bring up the KKK in a film? Did you not approve of how the KKK was depicted in this film?
shareIn a movie about history, perhaps race relations, not a movie about tennis.
shareIncluding the KKK in a story of anyone who was attacked by them would be appropriate. Especially considering how the American public needs to be informed about how racism continues to be a black eye for this country.
shareToo many people claim to be attacked by them to get the victim card like Richard in this movie. KKK is not the problem anymore and neither is racism.
shareSo no one should ever mention injustice they experienced in the past? If we don't remember the past, then how will we retain the lessons it taught us.
Racism remains a huge problem in this country. I think the people who deny that it is a problem are lying to us.
Not in a movie that has nothing to do with it and certainly not 75 times. You are right, so called "racism" (aka. diversity induced between group conflict) will exist as long as America keeps being a multiracial country. The only solution is separation.
shareUGH🙄
shareAre you willing to join all of your like minded racist extremists to live in the parched Mahobi Desert while the rest of us decent folk continue to live our lives in the rest of the country?
shareI already live in a 99% White peaceful country with no racial problems and identity politics while you continue to support the very same system that is destroying you. Good luck, I hope BLM burns down your business so that you learn your lesson.
shareWhat country is that? The one in your imagination?
Why are you hoping that my livelihood is destroyed?
It's not imagination, it is a racially pure country and on the top 10 safest countries in the world. If you support the system that is hurting you (multiracialism) you deserve a hard lesson.
shareIt's funny that you don't want to name the country lol. As if by narrowing it down to the population of a whole-ass country you'd be making yourself vulnerable to an attack
You frequently come across as being psychologically unstable, and this display of paranoia seems to confirm that
Why should I? It doesn't matter to the disagreement we are discussing. There are dozens of affluent racially pure peaceful countries in the world, meanwhile most major multiracial ones have problems.
shareOk, I live in a peaceful, prosperous multiracial developed country in the top 10 safest countries in the world list
Does my vague anecdote trump your vague anecdote, or how does this work?
You have to list yours because your type of a country is rare, while mine is not.
shareNope that can be claimed without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. You have proved nothing.
shareYou need me to show you evidence that monoracial countries are successful? Japan, South Korea, Taiwan, Iceland, Finland, Switzerland...etc. The only reason most of Europe isn't racially pure is because those countries were so successful they attracted immigrants.
shareNope you made the claim. The burden of proof is on you.
shareWhat claim are you referring to?
shareName the country you are referring to.
shareSuccessful monoracial countries? I already did. Take a look 3 posts above.
shareNo no no. The specific country you live in. The one you claimed was totally safe. Lets see your answer Nazi boy.
shareI never said it's totally safe moron. Nowhere is "totally safe". I said it's one the top 10 safest countries in the world and very safe. Here is a list of top 10 safest countries:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_Peace_Index
All White countries and all with very few Black people.
No name the one you live in. You still have not name it. Lets hear it Nazi boy.
shareWhy, so you could find anything negative about my country so you could offend me? There are plenty of countries which have properties the ones I'm advocating (White, little racial diversity, peaceful and affluent) It is irrelevant where I'm from. It's irrelevant where you're from.(I haven't asked you and neither do I care) What matters are the arguments, and you haven't given any.
shareSee you won't do it. You won't say it because you know it opens you up to be attacked. Stay in that safe space buddy. Me 14 you 0 White supremacist Nazi boy.
shareYou've just admitted you're only interested in personal attacks, not arguments. Me 15 you 0.
shareNope I asked to provide proof of your claim. You won't do it. You won't do it because you know you are lying. Just for your arrogance I get another point. Me 15 you 0 Nazi boy.
shareWhat claim?? And calling someone who isn't a Nazi a Nazi is not an argument no more than me calling you a communist.
shareYeah, you're full of crap and too chicken to name your country because it is a fantasy.
shareHow about you name me a single successful Black country. Or name me a single tangible benefit of multiracialism.
shareI'm supposed to supply information to a person who cannot do the same?
shareExcuses, excuses. If you really think a peaceful affluent monorail societies are a fantasy, then you are really deluded. I could list several of them off the top of my head. Still waiting for you to list one benefit of multiracialism or a single developed Black country.
shareMauritius. Scoreboard me 13 you 0.
shareNot a Black country, majority are Indians. Blacks make up less than a third of the population. And even if it was it's still not a well developed country GDP per capita is only 11.600 dollars. You've just embarrassed yourself in TWO ways.
shareMe 13 you 0 white supremacist Nazi boy. I just proved that a country with a race other than whites is successful. Honestly debating you is far too easy. I could actually list others but you would deny it. So now go ahead and provide proof of your claims. You have not so lets see it. And no white supremacist websites do not count.
shareOh so now that I caught you in a lie that Mauritius isn't a Black country, you are back pedalling and attempting to change what I asked you to? I never claimed a non White country can't be successful. Plenty East Asian countries are (Japan, South Korea, Taiwan....). And you didn't even give me a example. Mauritius isn't successful country. It's GDP per capita is lower than Bulgaria despite having a 12 month a year tourist seasons.
Show me
1.) a successful Black country or
2.) show me a successful Brown country that isn't successful due to natural resources like oil.
"Racism not the problem" says man who thinks racial segregation is the solution. Solution to what? The racism that you say isn't a problem?
Separation isn't oppression. In fact, it's the exact opposite.
shareNon sequitur. I never mentioned oppression. You said racism is not a problem. Then you suggested that racial segregation is the solution, to a problem you say doesn't exist.
shareRacial conflict exists, no one can deny that, just look at the news. But racism is on behalf Whites is nowhere near the bogeyman the left has portrayed it to be. The left is chasing racist ghosts.
The term "racism" implies that something is inherently immoral. If something is not oppressive, it's not inherently immoral. Therefor by conceding that racism is not oppressive, you are conceding it's not inherently immoral.
You said that racism is not a problem, and you supplied an inherently racist solution to a problem you said isn't one. Only you mentioned immorality and oppression and yet you feel you need to argue the definitions of both with me as if they are my rebuttal.
I think the shallow gene pool where you're from must be the reason why you're so stupid.
Do you deny that separation would be a solution to racial problems that exist in America? Can you name one racial problem that would remain if races were to separate?
And why do you call separation immoral? ("racist"). There is nothing immoral about it. Czechs and Slovaks separated and they had much less differences and ethnic problems than Whites and Blacks today in the USA.
If the left really think Whites oppress Blacks so much, why are they against separation. It's really hypocritical.
No one pretends they did not exist. They were Democrats, too. Democrats pretend they were really Republicans.
share