Hip Hop and racism

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by inchrgofmine

Damn Race--Its all about class. It just so happens that poor folk are predominately people of color.

---

the issue of class is an abstraction of the race issue. the ones who have impoverish the ones with color have done this around the world. so this can't be a class by itself. its a class of race. which race is the better class to educate the world as to the lifestyle/culture to follow/adopt for the fulfillment of what they wish/want out of life. what kind of ideology is getting espoused from this race that puts color people in the poor house while they sit atop the riches and forever steepen the hill to reach the top. saying this is just a class issue is about marginalizing how they live which is policed by politics about race. this society was built/founded on the race issue - class was whether first or second citizen, but then no seconds they were slaves.

why are the poor predominantly of color ? i doubt they want to be yet this is something that has happened around the world throughout history the whites have gone and instilled a class system based off race. implanting a politic to divide that given society to conquer the people's minds.

would Mugabe be considered a black supremist?

I don't know much about Mugabe...I got this from wikpedia. What about him is supremist?

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...avezMugabe.jpg

Although President Mugabe encounters considerable opposition from the West, he has strong support throughout governments of the third world. Above,Venezuela PresidentHugo Chávez embraces Mugabe during the 60th anniversary celebrations of the United Nation's Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) in RomeOctober 17, 2005 At the event, Mugabe and Chávez both denounced the United States and other capitalist countries for trying to dominate the world, invading Iraq and Afghanistan, seeking to impose capitalism in other countries, and blamed them for world poverty and hunger.

[QUOTE=Aqueous Moon]I don't know much about Mugabe...I got this from wikpedia. What about him is supremist?QUOTE]

he is for kicking out and displacing whites reclaiming the landf for blacks and has a sense of duty to his people where the 'west' is now trying to lambast him as 'morally' evil for just those actions. also for the fact he is siding with third world countries against the policies the 'west' uses against third world countries which the 'west' double back on. example trade and loans - loans will never be paid off as the goods that they export are not helped at the markets for the 'west' doles out subsidies to their farmers which hurt the ones in third world countries. it would be like the natives in amerikkka taking back the land and kicking out whites. would that not be justice?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LHX

we wouldnt even be talking about this shit if everybody had empty stomachs and guns to they heads

nobody should tolerate anything



nobody even really knows what happened in history
and yet
everybody is still trying to justify our current society based on this 'history'


world history has as much credibility as mystery gods

---

That's fair enough.

history is written by the victors and the earth cries out from the blood of the losers whose voices are not heard/told about in the books. the myths/legend of history have some truth since most tell the same accounts though they are widespread across the globe. remember world history didn't start six thousand years with adam and eve. for that is regulated as the start of the times we are living end. the times of the white man's rule. the times before the world according to the bible were different and not so alluded to with mysteries that no one can explain.

Quote:

---

remember world history didn't start six thousand years with adam and eve. for that is regulated as the start of the times we are living end. the times of the white man's rule.

---

Are you suggeting here that the "white man'" has been ruling for 6,000 years?

he came into existence around six thousand years ago and was kicked out from the societies that have writen about his appearance. the bible is a record of the white man from his appearance to his downfall. you can read the book from the original man to the whiteman: making of the whiteman by paul l guthrie. it tells of traditions in which the white man came was kicked out for two thousand years then his reappearance and the subsequent times that have come into being. the accounts range from the egyptians the dravidians the tibetan buddhists and even the acoounts of a greek historians account of the peoples writings about the people who had 'white'skin as opposed the ones who had more golden tones.

so to answer shortly yes.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dif de la rev

he came into existence around six thousand years ago and was kicked out from the societies that have writen about his appearance.

---

Coming into existence and ruling are two different things....but I'll read the rest to see if you have answered my specific question.

Quote:

---

the bible is a record of the white man

---

Explain what you mean by "of" the white man.

Quote:

---

from his appearance

---

Written by....?

Quote:

---

to his downfall.

---

They had many downfalls which do you speak of?

Quote:

---

you can read the book from the original man to the whiteman: making of the whiteman by paul l guthrie. it tells of traditions in which the white man came was kicked out for two thousand years then his reappearance and the subsequent times that have come into being. the accounts range from the egyptians the dravidians the tibetan buddhists and even the acoounts of a greek historians account of the peoples writings about the people who had 'white'skin as opposed the ones who had more golden tones.

---

I've read it, some of it is good information some of it is bullshit. Or would you say that it stands alone as an infallible document?

Quote:

---

so to answer shortly yes.

---

White men were not even ruling the Americas 600 years ago. Show and Prove how they have been ruling for 6,000 years.

it seems that you arwe looking for an argument for you have taken a stance against what i wrote. so you must take offense at the statement for you seem to be defending the 'white' man against my accusations. this isn't a religious or spiritual discussion but one of politics. so if you are mouthing in their defence then i have no objection then to not bump heads over a political disagreement.

question: is there any record they have where in their advancement around the globe since the days of greeco-roman where they have gone/come in peace or have wars strife and pestilence been the main result.

fuck

this whole mess really sucks dick


the white man cant even rule his own household
yet
somehow he is leading the planet into ruin

Total shit.

this thread is titled hip hop and racism. that entails politics as to whether there is a form of racism in hip hop either from the people who started or has/is racism being injected through the selling/marketing and branding of the music. is racism stereotyping th music in hip hop? does racism fuel such artist to talk about killing a 'white' devil? even though whites are the main funders to the hip hop culture and take on the lifestyle can they be said to kinow what is being felt by the rappers within ? remember hip hop was not in the suburds nor a culture fortune 500 regarded as being prpofitable or even a lifespan this long ? like busta rhymes said there are more people getting rich of this music thsat don't evern like it. hip hop became coporatized which killed the street ethics and made it something that could be packaged ask any a&r where it could be co opted and now you have kids conforming to what look hard be down get cool points?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by dif de la rev

[COLOR="Silver"]it seems that you arwe looking for an argument for you have taken a stance against what i wrote.

---

I took a stance not only against what you wrote, but against what others obviously feel as well regarding the same "whitte man ruling for 6,000 years".

Forums whether in the world, or on the internet are set up with the express purpose to conversate, build, and occasionaly arguements arise. Now, did I start an arguement with you or did I ask you a direct question?

Quote:

---

so you must take offense at the statement for you seem to be defending the 'white' man against my accusations.

---

I take offense at lies, yes. But please explain how me saying it's BULLSHIT that the white man ruled for 6,000 years is "defending" him? Let us know how you came to THIS conclusion and the logic behind it.

Quote:

---

this isn't a religious or spiritual discussion but one of politics. so if you are mouthing in their defence then i have no objection then to not bump heads over a political disagreement.

---

See above.

Quote:

---

question: is there any record they have where in their advancement around the globe since the days of greeco-roman where they have gone/come in peace or have wars strife and pestilence been the main result.

---

]

I don't thunk you're in a position at this time to ask me a question when you still fail to answer the simple basic question that I posed to you, which was:

Quote:

---

White men were not even ruling the Americas 600 years ago. Show and Prove how they have been ruling for 6,000 years.

---

they had have first devise a system to which exploit the other peoples that they have. first develope a culture and society that affirms and conforms to that. they have no record except that they came from the caucus mountains . from that their is the detirioration of the civilizations from egypt to the indus valley in india. after which we get the greeks with the philosophical sciences and arts of math and science. while in the indus valley the first caste system is started bu these 'aryans' from the mid-east.

the first crusades the taking of the cultures from egypt and indus valley. the second crusades the roman empire in their expansion and assimilating of those they conquered. the third crusade the christians against the muslims for jerusalem. each 'crusade' was not just a evolutionary step in the progress of his (white mans) means of civilization but was through the force of war upon those who resisted their culture and society and values it espoused.

as to their rule they had to from the pillaging and raping of other cultures get their backyard in order (see africa and mid east). remember they thought world was flat. they had a society of the alpha male the man on top the king ruler for self not the people perpetuated through a feudal system from which they had to politicize to an orderly system. they came this way by thinking they could get east. the system of their ideological developement took epochs to become something that they could package as opposite from the ledgend of remus and romulus suckling at a wolf's tit to being the clean cut ambassadors for truth and justice.