It's Kamala!

[GMDino]

(08-25-2020, 12:55 AM)Dill Wrote: I wouldn't. And don't. That's why  I have for years argued against using race as political marker. And I am not perpetuating it by referencing the history, or by affirming there is an African-American culture distinct from that of African diaspora in the Carribean and South America. Seems like you are denying this history and its effects, or implying that its recognition is validation of the one-drop rule.  

As I said above, "African features" would be facial features which, in some combination, triggered racial policing. E.g., dark and especially black skin. Thick noirette hair. And you are aware of how these and other genetic features were used to segregate African Americans. On this point I think that for once, we mean the same thing. You are not going to tell me that black people were not excluded from lunch counters in Birmingham Alabama in 1963 because of their black skin. So the question is why would you ask what "African features" are? 

I can see fodder for digressions here, which do not challenge at all what I have said about the construction of race in the US. E.g., some people of African descent can be very light skinned and some people who are not from Africa can be very dark. Or worse, recognition of different shades in skin color is itself somehow "racist."

To explain the part that doesn't makes sense--you heard me explain how race was a social construct for Leftists, then concluded it was "prison determinative" for no clear reason. No warrant for that inference.

Well you can't claim "the left" uses the one-drop rule without introducing legal discrimination any more than you could dissect a triangle without introducing geometry. If I'm "arguing a different point" its because you don't know what the one-drop rule is that you invokes, or how it was deployed. You are conflating different behaviors around recognition that some people have different skin colors. 

I have explained to you how "the left of today" treats race, cited two authors, and can provide more. Neither of those authors "use the same standard as the past."  Now it's clear that you can't cite any author that supports your claim.  


So EVERYONE in the US labels Obama and Kaepernick as Black, including Obama and Kaepernick, and your take away is that I "completely discount the parent who was not black." I'd love to hear what Obama and Kaepernick thought of this dialogue and my "disservice" to the memory of their genetics. Both of these men grew up in an America which discounted their white parents, and that is why they grew up with a special interest in Black history and politics.  And they aren't perpetuating racism by their choice. They are challenging it. 

No, you've not given me a single example of a leftist who uses the one-drop rule or says someone one-eighth black has to be black.
You continue to deflect the question.  And the Brazil reference is another example of race is variously defined.

I have a feeling that you cannot specify what is "odd" about my statement. Mentioning "past comments about black Trump supporters" without quoting them or explaining their relevance is no more substantive than saying my "posting history" proves something. 

When you refuse to acknowedge specific examples, or to provide your own, or to define terms, or to reference unspecified "comments" as if its clear what they were and their relevance to this discusssion, you are not really arguing in good faith, are you? You are trying to critique my views, which I am always happy to explain and support, while exposing your own as little as possible. Nence the critique is ad hoc and reactive.

My curiosity is now piqued by this reticence. How does your advocacy for recognition of "mixed race" identities fit into current politics, where LsQM also research and celebrate mixed race identities?  Why is it so important to conflate left wing views on race with right--without evidence?

Video and sources were used to show how the right wing noise machine has attacked black candidates and how they adopted that same tone and verbiage to attack Harris now.

That is being disputed by opinions that the "left" does the same.

This is a silly argument.