Sunday, November 11, 2018

The Projected Anger of Self-Disappointment

Cartoon satirizing the suspected white supremacist fed flames
of anger projected from certain tribes among the Black Nation,
that reflect their self-disappointment in failing to be properly
prepared when they shockingly found themselves with an
African-American President of the United States.

Dick RaphaĆ«l - Is Donald Trump right when he said that President Barack Obama has done nothing during his presidency for African-Americans?

Muhammad Rasheed - No. President Obama did a lot for Black Americans, and had plans to do even more. Unfortunately his most ambitious plans required a Democratic Party President of the United States to come after him to build upon them, and since it looks like Trump is trying to break the USA so nobody will ever be able to use it again, I guess that’s that. It was fun while it lasted. smh

The actual problem is that the American people in general were so used to assuming that there wouldn’t be an African-American POTUS anytime soon, that when it DID happen, the extremely pessimistic Black community were ill-prepared. Despite the intense imploring of the new president-elect to “Tell me what to do!” during his 2008 victory speech, only a few scattered specialized activists and independent mavericks even tried to place mini-political agendas on Obama’s desk. The eight year silence from the Black community as a whole was deafening. Conspicuously, the Black Congressional Caucus members hastily slapped something together only in response to Trump’s “What do you have to lose?” insult to the Black constituency and that was it.

So now nearly two years into Trump’s presidency, we find many Black people upset at Obama because they think he didn’t do enough for them. I strongly suggest they seriously analyze those eight years, see what worked for those special interest groups who did have their stuff together and promptly responded to Obama’s directive with a rock-solid political agenda checklist to get what they demanded. There is a process to all of this; Obama wasn’t just going to pull up to everyone’s houses in a Brink’s™ truck, give everyone dap and a $50,000 cheque just because. Life doesn’t work that way, and you still have to put in the work to get what you say you want.

Especially when you find yourself as the disenfranchised group everyone else likes to exploit.

Obama did a lot for the Black American inside of the narrow area he had to work in, but he could have done MUCH more if the Black community themselves had engaged in the political arena and actively partnered with him in it. When you know better, you do better. It’s not too late. Now that we know what’s needed we can start TODAY! to work together across class and ideological lines, put together our formal Black Political Agenda, effectively strategize as to how we will enfranchise ourselves and elect Black representatives committed to fighting for our special interest causes. Then the next time we find ourselves with a Black POTUS, we’ll tell her or him what to do so we can finally close out The Struggle and become truly free.

John Connolly - Why don't we as Americans of every non black race just give a part of our paycheck every week because of your oppression.You see how ridiculous you sound all most people hear is I am black blackity black black ,it's time to address your community problems on an individual level and take responsibility as a man.Obama was a failure and Trump is the rubber band snapping back,deal with it as a man not as a color.

Muhammad Rasheed - John wrote: “Why don't we as Americans of every non black race just give a part of our paycheck every week because of your oppression.”

You 100% should. It would not only help in fixing the anti-Black systemic racism evil your group has allowed to continue on into the modern day, but it will have the benefit of purifying your soul.

Do it.

Ed Guenther - "When You’re Accustomed to Privilege, Equality Feels Like Oppression"

@John... Nothing else needs to be said here. Of course, you didn’t give any real argument, but rants and typical right wing propaganda points.

Zev Rosenblum - Black Political Agenda? Isn't that just perpetuating political racism? I'd think a political system that was all inclusive would be the ideal.

Muhammad Rasheed - No, it wouldn’t be ideal. All it would do is enable strong and cohesive special interest groups who DO have a political agenda to hoard wealth & power from those who don’t, widening the wealth gap between the Black American ethnic group and everyone else.

Zev Rosenblum - Wait, how? By definition wouldnt an all inclusive agenda be a political counter to special interest groups?

What would keep the most powerful of the legacy families from ‘crony capitalism-ing’ their way into special interest status anyway, no matter what the all inclusive agenda was supposed to say? *sighhhh*

Muhammad Rasheed - The mere “definition” of an abstract term never reflects the real life jockeying for advantageous wealth & power positioning of actual politicking.

Roosevelt Pitt - This a fabrication. Now its black folks fault that Obama didn't do anything for black people as a group. Dr. Claude Anderson approached the Obama with a black agenda and he turned him away.

Muhammad Rasheed - Many of these items were built into the list of accomplishments Obama did put in place in some form or another. Even though they weren't as powerful as what Dr. Anderson hoped for, they still represent the basic structure that subsequent accountable Black representation can build upon.

Economic Policy Expert Claud Anderson Writes Open Letter to President Obama (2011)

Muhammad Rasheed - Roosevelt wrote: "Now its black folks fault that Obama didn't do anything for black people as a group."

In his 2008 victory speech, the new President Elect point blank told you to "tell me what to do!"

You failed to do so.

So he was forced to work the plan he did work that y'all are currently bitching wasn't good enough, while your political rivals brought him focused political agendas to "tell him what to do."

Instead of complaining you should instead analyze the process, take the lessons learned from what you failed to do to prepare for a Black POTUS' election, and get yourself together while you work on electing new Black representation to hold them accountable when you tell them what to do.

Arizechukwu Okeke - If he can't do anything for us because of the political process, then why bother voting in the first place?

Muhammad Rasheed - Arizechukwu wrote: "If he can't do anything for us because of the political process..."

That's a strawman effigy. He DID do stuff for us. He worked his own agenda battling against his partisan rivals. If there were specific items you wanted him to fight for, too, then why didn't you come together as a Black special interest group and formally put that political agenda in front of him in the process like the other Democratic Party special interest groups did for their communities?

What were you waiting for?

If you aren't going to work the political process ALL THE WAY, then why did you vote? Just to practice?

Saturday, November 10, 2018

Tantrums from the Willfully Blind

Cartoon satirizing the shallow arrogance of the barber shop
political pundit and his embarrassingly poor ability to grasp basic
facts to analyze for workable knowledge within vital systems.

Muhammad Rasheed - [TOON] Unrealistic, Magical-Thinking Expectations versus High-Level Political Strategy

Jay Watts - Still the cape is flapping...Your telling me that he couldn't do anything about police killing unarmed black people.

Muhammad Rasheed - He did provide a justice reform item that Sessions was trying to break. Didn't we already talk about that?

Jay Watts - What justice reform is this? I don't recall. But your telling me that as the POTUS he couldn't do anything to stop and punish those racist police from killing unarmed black people? I think at one point during his 2 terms, one or two unarmed black people got killed every week for a whole month.

Campbelle Thai - Did that justice reform produce justice?

Campbelle Thai - Remember, Obama signed blue legislation to protect law enforcement.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jay wrote: "What justice reform is this? I don't recall."

This is the fundamental problem with your position here. You only think you know what you are talking about. It's embarrassing watching you.

How US Attorney General Jeff Sessions Has Rolled Back Obama-era Policies | VOA News

It took Jeff Sessions just one month to turn Obama-era drug policy on its head | Washington Post

Jeff Sessions Is Trying To Take Criminal Justice Back To The 1990s | FiveThirtyEight

Attorney General Orders Tougher Sentences, Rolling Back Obama Policy | New York Times

Campbelle Thai - Criminal Justice Reform is to reform criminal justice in the manner that the ruling class prescribed to complement the built environment. In other words, the system is being refined to maintain the status quo through illusory implementations.

Jay Watts - @Muhammad ...Whats embarrassing is how you can't answer my original question about racist police killing unarmed people. The justice reform did nothing to address or said anything about it.

Campbelle Thai - He sharing articles to express for support his position.

Muhammad Rasheed - The justice reform work laid the foundation for fixing the issue... an issue that took decades and numerous presidential administrations to create. One two-term executive branch couldn't 100% fix it all by himself, but he was able to lay the foundation to build upon (which was why he campaigned so hard to get Clinton in there for 2016).

Muhammad Rasheed - Both to support my position and provide the sources for Jay's "What justice reform?" query.

Campbelle Thai - Fixing the issue? The issue is being repackaged, like slavery to Jim Crow, where the latter was said to be worse!

Muhammad Rasheed - Of course since he wasn't able to get his preferred candidate in office, while Trump's AG pick was dedicated to undoing what Obama intended.

Campbelle Thai - Jay Watts told you what is justice reform but you're giving the political honorable description of it, that isn't inline with its actions!

Jay Watts - He could have made an example out of those racist cops that evidence and other factors said they lied about what happened and it was a homicide. But he did nothing.

Campbelle Thai - Name me one favorable policy Muhammad for African Americans that hasn't been rescinded. I got the rest of my life!

Muhammad Rasheed - You're asking me to prove that Trump didn't want to break Obama's legacy?

Campbelle Thai - Remember, Obama signed Blue Live Matter law for law enforcement. That gave law enforcement full range to kill Blacks with impunity!

Campbelle Thai - No one asked you about Trump breaking Obama's so-called legacy!

Jay Watts - Also thats the trick...with the democrats they keep pushing it off to the next person to get into office. making some excuse why they can't take the issue on...because of election, not enough support, or im trying to get the next guy in.

Muhammad Rasheed - Obama signed it because he was able to put items in the bill that his side wanted. Instead of going back-n-forth with the GOP fruitlessly, he felt it at least would be something even if he had to put up with their stuff.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jay wrote: "...with the democrats they keep pushing it off to the next person to get into office."

Meanwhile, Obama built the foundation and needed the next admin to build up on it, no different than how the corrupt system got in place with numerous past admins building up on it. That's why he couldn't magically wave his hand and fix it all at once, otherwise he would have.

Jay Watts - Excuse, Excuse and more Excuses....mean while we are getting slaughtered in the streets.

Muhammad Rasheed - Campbelle wrote: "No one asked you about Trump breaking Obama's so-called legacy!"

Then please work harder to make your points clear.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jay wrote: "Excuse, Excuse and more Excuses..."

lol Since you're doubling down on the idea that Obama should have just used magic to fix the problem in Jan 2009, how about you just magically become POTUS and fix it in a day?

Muhammad Rasheed - Campbelle posted: "The Newest Jim Crow"

Michelle Alexander was one of the consultants for Obama's criminal justice reform efforts by the way.

It looks like the main issue here is impatience with the time it takes for the system to work even when you have all the right people on the team. I agree with you.

Unrealistic, Magical-Thinking Expectations versus High-Level Political Strategy

Cartoon satirizing lower-class Black community
disappointment that Obama's presidency didn't translate
into more obvious and immediate economic improvement
in their neighborhoods.

Muhammad Rasheed - [TOON] Election Day II: Rebel Without Direction 

Jay Watts - Voting without an agenda gets you nothing, just like we got under Obama. No one wants to push our agenda then we hold our votes.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jay wrote: "...just like we got under Obama."

[LIST] Obama’s Positive Track Record For Helping African-Americans

Muhammad Rasheed - Fortunately, President Obama brought his own pro-Black agenda even while he encouraged us to bring one we drafted to "tell him what to do," Jay.

Jay Watts - @Muhammad... Everything you named is not specific to black people, it says minorities, people of color or names us in something he did for everyone. Minorities are non whites, gay men, women including white women. I am black, I am not a person of color or a minority. Having a Pro-Black agenda is an agenda for Black people not Pro-Minority or Pro-People of Color. He did nothing about police killing unarmed black people (he even called us Thugs in Baltimore), Nothing about systematic racism, nothing about mass incarceration, nothing about Gentrification, nothing to curb the rise and crack down on White Supremacist groups, Didn't stop the war on drugs that effects us the most, and the list goes on. Please don't tell me all of our issues were impossible to get down,because he got others groups issue taken care of.

  • Yet Obama signed Blue Alert in to law. 
  • Landmark LGBT laws and executive orders including ending "Don't ask Don't tell", and ending the defense of DOMA. 
  • Delivered on Promises to get Native Americans money from lawsuits. 
  • Obama administration earmarked $12 million for Holocaust survivors. 
  • Obama supported the Dreamer Act and signed the executive order on DACA. Both of these primary effects Hispanics.

Muhammad Rasheed - As POTUS, Obama's job was to take care of everyone, but within that, he targeted the areas where Blacks were hurting the MOST. That way, he could get the most done for Black people in the limited timeframe he had, with hopes that the next POTUS from his party would build upon what he was able to do.

Jay wrote: "Please don't tell me all of our issues were impossible to get down, because he got others groups issue taken care of." 

Absent your Black Political Agenda that you failed to provide in 8 yrs, he instead worked the best political strategy he could to help his people for a long-term, pro-middle class effort.

He took care of the other groups because they were more politically savvy and showed up with their group's specialized political agenda.

Jay Watts - The "I'm not President of Black America but all of America" is BS. Considering our terrible history in this country I think we more than deserve a little special treatment.
Obama did nothing in all 8 years about the issues we where hurting the most on, even when it was forced on him like police slaughtering unarmed black people under his watch.

M. Rasheed wrote: "He took care of the other groups because they were more politically savvy and showed up with their group's specialized political agenda." 

You said it and we have a black agenda may not be political savvy but its an agenda. I won't vote til a candidate will push our Black agenda and take it on when we get him into office.

Muhammad Rasheed - Jay wrote: "Obama did nothing in all 8 years about the issues we where hurting the most on..."

Meanwhile, yes, he did. In fact, Jeff Sessions was actively working to break them.

Jay wrote: "Everything you named is not specific to black people..."

Does it have to be? These were all areas that represented where Blacks were hurting the MOST among those affected. You're performing a Moving the Goal Post logical fallacy.

Campbelle Thai - Strategically, Obama did nothing for Blacks! To add insult to injury, Obama signed law that made punishment worst for those who committed crime against the blue, while police killed Blacks in its greatest figures under his regime!

Zukpematsrizu Sotutsi - Obama also supported the murder of Gadaffi.

Sundiata Conde - Meh, I disagree with you on this one.

William Uchenna Okpala - yeah

Keith Tucker - You gotta take the RBG off the one on the right because Garvey wouldve been fine with the dude on the lefts stance. Malcolm X too. They wanted people to vote in people we control not just anybody or out of fear.

Cm Talley - It's like people who don't vote and don't realize a tax increase proposal passed that they would have voted against. #StayDumbDontVote

Marcellus Shane Jackson - We're "voting" under a policy of "benign neglect" (which is like voting for CRUMBS) most black people sticking their chest out because they voted don't even know what that means.


Keith Tucker - They like them crumbs and wont ever plot in a whole plate. Its weird.

Cm Talley - Homeowners. Over 40. With kids in college. Heavily invested in real estate and retirement income. Sorry son, my profile is mostly likey to vote to reap the benefits of a booming economy.

Ebon Lion - Closed mouths don't get fed. If you didn't vote you are basically playing into the hands of the folks who are counting on your apathy to get over. All I hear from folks that don't vote are pathetic excuses. If your vote doesn't matter then why are folk…See More

Keith Tucker - I would define black people who vote with no real black agenda as apathetic. Read Powernomics. I cant speak for people that just dont vote because they aint feel like it but those of us growing to want real power want a change in dynamic of how we vote and position with Democratic party.At some point the strategy has to upgrade out of reactionary and be more proactive. Idc who runs but if they not in our collective black pocket we not really using our voice optimally.

Marcellus Shane Jackson - Ethnic groups without control over INDUSTRIES, BUSINESSES, LAND AND RESOURCES don't get "fed" and don't get shit for their votes.

I'm saying this as a "super voter" someone who's voted in EVERY election since I was 18. So none of you negros can lecture ME about VOTING.

We're being PLAYED.

Voting is supposed to be the FINAL STEP in power. Not only do black folks think it's the first step, but far more think it's the ONLY step and gladly go back to sitting on their asses in front of the football game after they get their STICKER.

Black people don't care about or even worse think they don't need POWER...and piss their votes off for chump change. This is because our leadership is reduced to "celebrity worship".

But you never see Asians beating each other up over elections in front of building up their communities economically first and foremost. NEVER.

Marcellus Shane Jackson - But hey, keep putting gas in the car expecting it to run with a blown head gasket if ya want.

Marcellus Shane Jackson - The game is set.

I also wanna address this constant question.

"If your vote didn't matter why are the GOP so gangster about trying to suppress them?"

But I would rather black people USE THEIR MINDS INSTEAD OF TALKING POINTS and follow that to its logical conclusion with ANOTHER question...

Why is that in spite of being sensationalized in getting caught "suppressing votes" EVERY YEAR (and I mean every fuckin' year)... nothing, absolutely NOTHING ever actually happens to the GOP for doing it?

Has anybody ever seen a provision to stop or lawfully punish a party's acts of voter suppression on any ballot they've ever filled?

Dems = good cop

Repubs= bad cop

Blacks = scared perp with no lawyer.

Jermah Clements - People who in 2018 still think their votes don't count, are god damned morons, who cannot be reasoned with. The idea that black people cannot get policies passed that are beneficial to them because they do not controlled every aspect of America, is just fucking hotep bullshit. Everything involving your entire EXISTENCE in America involved politics. It picks your local judges, your DAs, the funding for your neighborhoods, the funding for your schools, your city counselors, what resources and services your city has, it sets the agenda for your entire city. Hell so many cities LOST rent control long ago BECAUSE mutha fuckas don't vote.

People are so STUPID, i swear. It's almost like unless something SPECIFICALLY SAYS "FOR BLACK PEOPLE" they can't even see it!!! When MILLIONS of black people got health insurance in MA for the FIRST TIME EVER, because folks voted for the candidates that would make it happen. Making MA the first state in the entire country with universal healthcare!!! That would NOT have been possible if liberals didn't show up and vote!

Voter suppression is possible because muthafuckas DIDN'T SHOW UP TO VOTE IN 2010!!!! In the dam year districts we able to be mapped!!!

Local elections are NOT THE ELECTORAL college!!!

If one does not vote, they have NO business complaining about anything.

You might not be able to set NATIONAL policy with a mere majority vote, but you sure as hell can set a local one!!! If folks don't vote, they have NO business complaining about anything.

And if anyone thinks there is no reason to vote, because it doesn't make a difference, you're a weak minded defeated HUSK! Begone!

Keith Tucker - First off. We coulda had universal healthcare or sumpn along the lines of that for us a long ass time ago but yall just vote yall dont organize how to make it happen. This is what it means when we say yall dont want power. We (black people) nationwide could have universal healthcare not just Mass.... thats the crumbs we talking about. We could have had helathcare the same way USAA provides insurances for its could be a private company we fund with a membership fee and rates we pay at a set rate since we members. Thats what Malcolm X and Garvey were trying to get for us to see. Thats the agenda these men were trying to get our elders to follow and the elders chose opposite. They some “hoteps” huh. Yall worried about whats on the ballot mad late. You are supposed to be using our collective wealth to influence what goes on the ballots like everybody else but carry on rolling slow and steady.

Jermah Clements - I don't have time for you hotepery...

Your votes matter at the local level. Especially in ANY city with minorities have the population numbers to make it matter....

FInd me a city with 100% black voter turnout, and tell me a difference isn't made, or stop your whining.

Find me a city where blacks are worse off, and then show me the voter %... and show me that they have the numbers AND voter turnout, and are still fucked...

Jermah Clements - If voting didn't matter, your enemy wouldn't be working so damn hard to KEEP you from being able to do it!!!!

Like how tf do people think they will get criminal justice reform, universal healthcare, guaranteed college, etc etc without voting??????????

It's so sad that people have such low intelligence that policies HAVE to say "FOR BLACK PEOPLE" in order for them to see it benefits black people.

Cm Talley - This country's history and economy is based on denying groups of people the franchise. Votes are indeed counted. Votes do determine policy. Policy determines who gets ahead.

Keith Tucker - money plus and agenda determines who gets ahead. Its been 2 days since the vote and alot of people that ive talked to said we can do both. We can vote and we can nation build. I havnt had a canvasser at my door to work on nation building....i havnt seen a push for nation building...when i voted for Obama the 1st time they promised me we can do both but nobody during that period did anything but become mad boujee and mad complacent...”but obamacare...” it can be repealed. Why notnhave a private company that you CONTROL supplying health care services for you?...all our insurances can be under one company. Thats a billion dollar industry that works us over... we all know it but yall waiting on politicians to fix it for you during voting season šŸ¤£ by the time next voting cycle comes around you should have everything we need to make sure we straight on ballots, politicians in pockets on both sides and enough things senup so even if our man or puppets dont win we dont feel it. Keep tirading about yall old way of voting. We already know how it works from the dynamic of used and abused. We want power and influence now.

Muhammad Rasheed - The Ku Klux Klan were literally formed to keep Black people away from the polls. That's the prime directive of anti-Black domestic terrorto disenfranchise you from the political process. During the 8 yrs of Reconstruction, the new Freedmen literally rose from slave to Congressmen and were well on their way to true equality in this Republic they helped build from the very beginning. The white people PANICKED and started the anti-Black vote suppression scheme that has continued up into the present day, which certainly has a marketing-propaganda arm to it.

If you as a Black person have actually bought into the scam that it doesn't matter if Black people vote or not, you are officially an honorary member of the KKK and an enemy of Black Empowerment.

Please stop.

Nolan Werner - Your cartoons are the closest thing I know of to the golden age of editorial cartooning from like the early 1900s

William H. Foster III - I suppose Prez Obama was supposed to be "AKA Black Santa Claus."

Thursday, November 8, 2018

Manufacturing Proof

Cartoon satirizing one of the many disbeliever strawman effigies
used to "debate" against theists, with this one illustrating
the nonsensical: "See, there's no God because you
can't MAKE people believe in it if they don't want to!"

Mina Sinard - Why does one need 'proof' that God exists? What constitutes 'proof'?

Muhammad Rasheed - No one needs ‘proof’ that God exists. The One God commands humankind to believe in their Guardian Lord who created them as a portion of their salvation. ‘Faith’ is the activating principle enabling one to avoid hell and attain the eternal bliss of paradise according to the One God’s message revealed as a guide for that very purpose.

Therefore, anyone claiming that ‘proof’ is needed for God to exist, when God doesn’t require it at all, is speaking as an enemy and is not to be trusted or taken seriously.

Sam Adams - "Faith is believing what you know ain’t true." ~Mark Twain

But if you want a serious answer, did you know I can fly like Superman? Believe me? Or do you need proof? And if you won’t believe that without proof why would you believe an even more incredible claim (that god exists) without proof?

Muhammad Rasheed - The Wright Bros had faith that their experimentation would pay off despite all the failure from both them and their rivals. It’s difficult to take Twain’s comment seriously as he was clearly not an expert on the topic. #IsThisYourGod

You’re an Internet troll asking me if I believe your unsolicited claims that I have no reason to care about. I don’t think you thought that through all the way.

Sam Adams - Not at all.

I did think it thru. You’re the one that hasn’t thought thru what it means to believe something without proof. If you won’t believe my unproven claim why would you believe an even more amazing one - that there is some sort of all powerful invisible superbeing that not only created the universe but who is busy watching everything you do?

But if you don’t like that, why would you need proof that unicorns exist? (They’re even referenced in the Bible). Or that pixies exist? Or centaurs?

Muhammad Rasheed - You clearly didn’t think it through.

The all-powerful One God said XYZ, while this “Sam Adams” said ABC, and thinks it reasonable that his ABC should be taken equally as seriously as the Supreme Creator’s XYZ.

And that makes sense to you? No wonder you quoted Twain’s claptrap with such confidence.

Muhammad Rasheed - Honestly, what do you have that would make me believe you over God? You’re a human just like me, who fits the exact same profile of every shallowly arrogant disbeliever I have ever met. Did you magically become all-powerful and all-knowing at some point? Do you have an ages old enduring scriptural message found throughout human civilization in some form or another? From here you look exactly like the disbeliever type that God makes fun of in the Book.

What’s supposed to be different about YOU?

Twain quoting?

Sam Adams - I didn’t think it thru? Why should I believe something with no evidence?

And I know my claim was nonsensical - that’s the entire point.

Do you believe in unicorns? They’re even referenced in the bible.

But, if you want to be taken seriously you’re going to have to start by proving that a “Supreme Creator” exists. And given that far smarter people than anyone posting here have been trying to prove that for centuries with absolutely no success I do wish you luck.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: "I didn’t think it thru?"

No. The rules of the belief system are thus and so, but you insist those rules should be replaced with rules of your own liking in order for you to participate and you somehow believe that is a reasonable position to take. The choice is to either accept the system on its terms, or walk away.

Sam wrote: "Why should I believe something with no evidence?"

Because you would want to enjoy the reward offered in exchange for that belief. You either agree to play or reject it. Those are the options.

Sam wrote: "And I know my claim was nonsensical - that’s the entire point."

The problem with your point is that you pitted your finite human-level understanding that begins and ends with "Sam Adams" against the Word of the Supreme Creator of reality, whose revealed message is the enduring scripture of the ages that entire civilizations have been built up around. You're going to have to level up significantly in order for your point to make sense in the way you wished it to from my perspective as a believer.

Sam wrote: "Do you believe in unicorns? They’re even referenced in the bible."

Here: Aaron Breceda's answer to Does the Bible refer to unicorns?

The reason why you take the position you take is because you don't care to know anymore about the topic than the shallow portion you only think you know. You don't have an argument, "Sam Adams."

Sam wrote: "But, if you want to be taken seriously..."

At this point I'm genuinely curious as to why someone who should know I 100% believe they are doomed to eternal torment would think I was concerned as to whether they took my opinions about the unseen spirit they reject seriously or not.

Sam wrote: "’re going to have to start by proving that a 'Supreme Creator' exists."

To recap, that Supreme Creator told me in the revealed scripture provided for the purpose that 'proof' isn't needed at all, only my faith is needed as the activating principle to Win at Life. By contrast, those doomed to fail miserably and colossally at life hold the exact opposite opinion of what that Supreme Creator said.

But you've expressed that I should somehow be concerned as to whether you take ME seriously or not. Curious.

Sam wrote: "And given that far smarter people than anyone posting here have been trying to prove that for centuries with absolutely no success I do wish you luck."

The Supreme Creator is the very Author of TRUTH -- God spoke reality itself into existence and is the determiner of what is real or not real (that's why God gets to be God, you see). So it would seem that all of these odd souls who've wasted -- centuries, you say? -- trying to prove that the Omniscient Lord of All the Worlds is wrong, are no where near as "smart" as you want to give them credit for. lol

I suggest you repent, submit your whole will to your Guardian Lord who created you, do good deeds in this world in the name of God and reject evil that you may manage to save yourself from hell.

Sam Adams - No, I am not insisting those rules be replaced with anything. I’m just saying “provide some evidence that your belief is true”.

After all, there are thousands of other gods that are worshiped by billions of people. What makes you think that you’re right and they’re wrong.

What makes your belief in your god any different from someone else’s belief in Odin, Zeus, Mithra, El Shaddai, or whoever? You can’t all be right.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: “No,  I am not insisting those rules be replaced with anything.”

And yet that’s exactly what your entire argument is hinged upon.

You see me playing baseball, but you don’t want to play unless I use the tools of baseball for the game of jacks you prefer instead. In a matter of faith, the belief system of the unseen spirit, scientific proofs or evidence is not required. Insisting that the tools of an alien system not designed for them are forced into use—or you will proclaim them false from your unreasonable position that doesn’t fit this system’s rules—functions as an attack.

Sam wrote: “I’m just saying ‘provide some evidence that your belief is true.’”

Why would I even attempt to entertain that concept when my belief system literally doesn’t require it to function? In fact, “Belief that the System is true” is literally the activating principle that sets it in motion. So your request comes across like: “I’m just saying you should bite the back of your own head’s fish light.”

Sam wrote: “After all, there are thousands of other gods…”

There’s just One God who has always told humankind from the beginning of the species that there was just the One God. Humans tend to add their own foolishness to the message in the linear flow of human culture creation, which required the continuous anointing of new prophets to set us back on the Path of Truth: There is no God but the One God. All of this is explained in the revealed scripture sent to us for the purpose, to guide us aright that we may know Truth.

Sam wrote: “What makes you think that you’re right and they’re wrong. You can’t all be right.”

God is the Determiner of what is right and what is wrong, and instructed us in Truth in the Book (conspicuously, none of these other ‘deities’ you’ve listed have ever provided a response scripture of any kind when the One God declared them all as fictions). It’s our job to align to it so we can Win.

Sam Adams - No it’s not. You’re making an argument that has no more support than a belief in Zeus, Odin, or El Shaddai. Or unicorns for that matter. If you want to believe something for absolutely no reason beyond “someone told you it’s true” or “you’ve got a book” that’s fine. But don’t expect that belief to rank any higher than my belief in the Flying Spaghetti Monster or any other mythical being.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: “No it’s not.”

Sure, it is.

Sam wrote: “You’re making an argument that has no more support than…”

The support comes from the record of sacred scripture, which is a real thing. That’s a real thing that the other ‘deities’ you’ve listed lack altogether, yes?

something > nothing

Sam wrote: “Or unicorns for that matter.”

Did that link go over your head? The original ancient Hebrew was literally referring to a mono-horned animal that is now extinct. :) The quasi-modern scribes tossed in “unicorn” because that was their only frame of reference.

Sam wrote: “If you want to believe something for…”

I believe because my Maker said it was so. That’s how I Win. So I Win.

Sam wrote: “…that’s fine.”

I KNOW it’s fine, because my Maker said it was so.

Sam Adams - Hate to tell you this but there are other religions in this world with their own sacred scriptures. What makes you think your book is any more valid than theirs is?

The claim that support for your ideas comes from sacred scripture is no more valid than claiming that that support for Zeus, Mithra, Odin or any other god comes from the writings of their believers.

To digress - a thought exercise:

Choose any god but your own (could be one of the ones I suggested or another one - all that’s important is that you don’t believe that god exists);
Tell us why you believe that god does not exist;
Apply the same logic to your god;
Congratulations you are now an atheist.

As for the “truth” of your sacred scripture, there are two classical logical fallacies that you should be aware of:

Argument from Antiquity - basically says that something must be true because it’s been around for a long time;
Argumentum ad Populum (argument from the people) - basically an argument that concludes something must be true because many people believe it.

As for your claim that you believe something because your maker told you it’s true, when did you last talk to him? [If I was being sarcastic I’d tell you that I might believe Timothy Leary if he told me that but not too many other people.] How exactly did he tell you?

So we’re back to my original point. Why should I believe that your god exists if you don’t believe that all the others exist?

Muhammad Rasheed - Show me just one of these rival scriptures that directly addresses the claims of the One God and contradicts them, please.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: “…when did you last talk to him?”

That’s literally the point of sacred scripture; in talking to me He talked to all of humankind. I apologize for assuming that was elementary enough not to need explanation. I thought that part was commonly understood.

Muhammad Rasheed - Neither of the two showcased logical fallacies apply to me, and your attempt to pin them on me—despite my not having used those as points—counts as a strawman effigy. If anything I’m ‘guilty’ of using the circulus in probando one instead.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: “Why should I believe that your god exists if you don’t believe that all the others exist?”

You should believe in God to save yourself from eternal torment and so you may enjoy eternal bliss.
You should believe because the One God is the only God to definitively tell humanity who He is with a formal message, tell us what His relationship to creation is, and to provide formal guidance that we may prosper from the knowledge that our Guardian Lord is real.

I don’t care whether you do one or the other; it’s not my job to save you, just to share the message. You may do as you like with the info with my blessing.

In the message, God explains that it was humankind who strayed and invented the fictional deities that you lot are so fond of listing for me in these arguments after clear guidance had already been given about the matter. It’s the reason why God had to anoint regular prophets to guide us back to the Right Way every time we did it.

Sam Adams - I don’t want you to save me. So far you’re doing a pretty poor job of convincing me that there is any validity to your opinions. But you should watch this - take particular note of what he says at the 45 second mark and his immediately following comments.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: “I don’t want you to save me.”

Do you at least realize that you saying that after I point blank told you it WASN’T my job to save you makes this comment a formal, textbook strawman effigy logical fallacy? Saving you isn’t in my to-do list, so you may battle against that faux-argument all you like without me.

Sam wrote: “So far you’re doing a pretty poor job of convincing me…”

Another strawman. It is 100% NOT my job to convince you, O Mr. Horse, to drink from the water, it was just my job to let you know it was there in the usual fashion. It’s your job to BELIEVE.

Sam wrote: “But you should watch this…”

No, I shouldn’t.

Literally there’s nothing you’ve typed here that gives me any motivation in clicking a link that impresses you. No thanks.

Sam Adams - As far as I can tell you’re comments boil down to “I believe what I believe because I believe it”. Hardly impressive reasoning.

All I really want is some evidence supporting your beliefs - and a 2,000 year old book written by men doesn’t constitute evidence.

As for my video - I only posted that to explain why I don’t want to be saved (by you or anyone else). But if you’re afraid to have your faith challenged that’s your call.

But if for the sake of argument we assume that the god of the bible exists he’s a moral monster. A demon. And he’s definitely not worthy of worship.

You might want to read this book - just collections of passages from the Bible that prove that the god of Abraham has earned the title of the most unpleasant being in all fiction many times over.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: “As far as I can tell you’re comments boil down to ‘I believe what I believe because I believe it.’”

Allow me to assist: I believe what I believe because the All-Powerful Supreme Creator of the heavens & the earth said it was so and I would be a fool to reject truth.

Sam wrote: “Hardly impressive reasoning.”

Do you somehow believe it is impressive to insist that a literal “belief system” that uses ‘faith’ as it’s activating principle should somehow conjure non-belief system tools to dance for the whims of a narrow-minded outsider? Because your position doesn’t seem even remotely reasonable or even basic-level intelligent. It sounds like you’ve dedicated yourself to the tantrums of a brat.

Sam wrote: “All I really want is some evidence…”
Who cares what you want?

Sam wrote: “…supporting your beliefs - and a 2,000 year old book written by men doesn’t constitute evidence.”

Books don’t count as evidence, huh, Mr. Moving-the-Goal-Post? Better tell all those scholars to stop citing them then.

Sam wrote: “As for my video - I only posted that to explain why I don’t want to be saved (by you or anyone else).”

lol For at least the third time, it’s not my job to save you, Sam. What’s wrong with you? I mean, really? hahahaha

Sam wrote: “But if you’re afraid to have your faith challenged that’s your call.”

Read back through this thread and kindly point out all the times you were supposed to have actually challenged my faith. Strawman effigies aren’t challenges, if you please.

You don’t know enough to challenge me on this stuff.

Sam wrote: “But if for the sake of argument we assume that the god of the bible exists he’s a moral monster.”

God invented morality as you know it, and this is just more of your tantrum because you refuse to believe and you lack an actual argument.

Sam wrote: “You might want to read this book…”

lol No, I might not. (see: my above response to your other offer to watch a whatever) Stop doing that, please. You are not leaving the impression upon me that you think you are.

Sam Adams - M. Rasheed wrote: "...the All-Powerful Supreme Creator of the heavens & the earth said it was so"

If you have any proof of that, you might have a point.

And all those so called “challenges to your faith” reduce to “prove it”.

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam wrote: "If you have any proof of that, you might have a point."

lol Remember that Book you said somehow didn't count because of your arbitrary disbeliever rules for a system you don't know enough about and don't believe in because you just don't care? Books are often used as proof even under secular rules, it turns out.

But I don't have to "prove it" because the system doesn't require proof to function. So you aren't challenging the faith, you are having a tantrum because you can't have your way: "Make this ice cream fly under its own power! Do you take the challenge?!" lol

Muhammad Rasheed - Sam's meme: "There's not a single religion that can survive these two words: Prove It"

You know Al-Islam is 1,500 yrs old (and counting), right? In the Qur'an, Allah actually quotes/paraphrases 7th century Arab disbelievers asking for 'proof' of the prophet Muhammad's claims (pbuh). Do I need to point out that there's significantly more Muslims in the world today than there were back when God revealed the verses making fun of those simps?

I think your meme lost the 'not a single religion can survive our narrow-minded challenge" contest, unless 1,500 yrs somehow doesn't count as "survival" to you. But thanks for playing, I guess.

Wednesday, November 7, 2018

Election Day II: Rebel Without Direction

Cartoon depicting the tendency of the chronically frustrated
expressing proclamations of bold actions that are
unfortunately short on valuable strategic insight.

Ronald Florence - How has voting helped black people?

Muhammad Rasheed - Voting enables the Black American people to use the political apparatus to get the resources and policies they need from the government so they can have the highest quality of life they strive for. The first and last time they were able to use it for anything close to it’s highest potential for themselves was after chattel slavery was abolished during Reconstruction. After that voting was used at a much lower fraction of its potential to score other major milestone victories for Black people like the dismantling of jim crow and the restoring of many civil rights.

The question gives the curious impression that there is something actually wrong with voting that Black people maybe should be rightfully suspicious of. This is actually far, far from the truth as voting is a key Weapon of the People in the arsenal needed for full Black Empowerment with our right to an abundant life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Using the power of the Black Vote correctly will enable us to open the doors to acquire everything we desire as fully-realized citizens of these United States of America.

The only problem is that the dominant special interest group considers the Black American ethnic group to be both competition and preferred prey, and they prefer them in the prey role. Consequently, the country’s voting rights processes and tools have been sabotaged to keep Black people from making the progress they need to be truly free here. The Ku Klux Klan and other domestic terror groups were specifically founded to turn Blacks away from the polls because whites didn’t want to stop exploiting them, and they certainly didn’t want Blacks eventually ruling over them in a truly equal society.

So voting at this time still represents the unfulfilled promise of Hope & Change for the Black American, the same one that whites fear & dread as a reality. Over the centuries we’ve seen glimpses of the glory that Blacks could reap from it if left alone to have their rights as citizens and unfortunately that untapped potential is all that voting has done in helping them due to the schemes of our traditional rival.

Tuesday, November 6, 2018

Election Day: The Triggering

Cartoon illustrating an example of curious fury expressed
by white conservatives when witnessing Black people
vocalizing their desire for self-representation, self-empowerment
and self-enfranchisement in this "post-racial" environment.

Muhammad Rasheed - What does it mean when some white conservatives get angry when Black people express the desire for enfranchisement and empowerment? Why do whites call it "racist"?

I can only speculate that it means white people are afraid that an equality of the races scenario resulting from Black Empowerment would represent a loss in power & wealth for them, so the instant response is a negative emotional outburst they can’t honestly vocalize with straight talk without revealing thoughts they’d rather not express outside of their protective Whitopia bubble.

Monday, November 5, 2018

Real Black Representation

Second in a series illustrating the four tools needed for
Black Enfranchisement: 1) Black Vote 2) Focused Black Political Agenda
3) Loyal, Black Representation 4) Black Economic Boycott.

Sam Eiji - Why is it so hard for American politicians to pass a new law to protect the lives of black people from police brutality and racism?

Muhammad Rasheed - Because the Black American isn’t leveraging power as a group to MAKE American politicians do it. They are scattered about, either ignoring the political game altogether, working in some partisan office as just another job, or are devoting all of their talents fighting to pass laws that aid rival special interest groups.

No one is currently fighting for the needs of the Black American special interest group. No one.

Jeffrey Chen - I will fight for their cause.

Muhammad Rasheed - Thanks, but it’s critical that they do it for themselves.

Jeffrey Chen - But of course. Remember the Chris Rock routine? The issues in there are what plague black families.

Muhammad Rasheed - Remember the title essay “Black Rednecks & White Liberals” from the Black conservative Thomas Sowell? He proved that the part of Rock’s bit you are pointing at was actually the influence of someone else and doesn’t belong to me. The ‘Multicultural’ scheme of the white liberal is trying to force it to be mine though, and it’s a perfect example of why my people need to do this enfranchisement plan for themselves.

I revoke my original “Thanks” now that you were kind enough to reveal how you really feel about my people.

Sunday, November 4, 2018

Properly Harnessing the Power of the Black Vote

The first in a series illustrating the four tools needed
for Black Enfranchisement: 1) Black Vote
2) Focused Black Political Agenda 3) Loyal, Black Representation
4) Black Economic Boycott.

Dr. Boyce Watkins - [ARTICLE] Voter drive raised millions, but Abrams won't say from whom | AJC

Honestly, I really think the people should know where politicians are getting their money from. As a finance professor myself, I can tell you that it’s a mistake to assume that finances don’t define how a politician makes their key decisions.

I won’t be the one to say this, but I hope this isn’t a red flag. Many black elected officials are secretly paid by donors who help them market to get black votes, but then serve he interests of those who funded the marketing.

They tend to lean on the fact that many of us automatically assume that black Democrats always have our backs. But the fact that she won’t disclose her source of funds makes you wonder what they are hiding.

BeatsMaverick - So, Dr. Watkins, who should we vote for because all I’m getting from you is problems,we all know the problems,give us the solutions Sir! Problems problems problems! Like we don’t already know them.

Cynthia G - The fact that they're using celebrities and aggressively trying to get you to vote means you should use your power and DON'T VOTE. Change only comes through deprivation.

Must black people continue to be the only group of people who ALWAYS fall for the same okie dokes? Must we continue to show our learning disability by repeating the same non effective solutions? Voting only shows that you still believe that the system can be changed but, does nothing to change the plight of black people. Your ancestors did not die so you could vote, they died so you could choose whether you want to or not. #DontVote #ChessNotCheckers #BlackPower

Muhammad Rasheed - @Cynthis G... Or better yet, use the power of our vote for a focused Black Political Agenda checklist of items that benefit us. We haven't done that trick since Reconstruction and the Civil Rights Act.

It's time we pulled our old Black Empowerment kit out of the mothballs...

Cynthia G - @Muhammad... Who's presenting the black political agenda tho?

Muhammad Rasheed - @BeatsMaverick... We should vote for the hand-picked, hand-groomed representative that we hold accountable to a focused Black Political Agenda that meets our needs. This representative comes form the midst of the community and is specifically committed to the empowerment, enfranchisement and economic inclusion of Black people.

ivyc_1 @Muhammad... I totally agree but the time to do that is between election cycles. Not days before. At this point at the very least we need to focus on getting the racist bigots out or keep them from getting in. Why do our own people trot in right before elections to divide us? Totally suspect. This is how we got trump.

Muhammad Rasheed
- @ivyc_1... The time to do it is the very second we know better. Being properly politically savvy--and taking the time to groom our army of Black Political Agenda-focused representatives--is a full-time job. We have a LOT of catching up to do.

Muhammad Rasheed - @Cynthia G... Nobody right now. The one Black people put together during the 1972 Gary Convention was literally sabotaged & squashed by the NAACP. Then the Black Congressional Caucus threw together a half-assed one in response to Trump's "What do you have to lose?" insult.

The Black Political Agenda is something the people themselves have to put together, pushing the checklist of items they need for their empowerment. We can't wait for others to do it for us. Our vote really is powerful (that's why lynching incidents have increased corresponding to stronger political pushback by minority Democrats), but if it isn't used the way the political system is designed to use it then others absolutely will redirect that power to fuel their own agendas.

Anonymous - Has the situation of blacks in America improved under Democrats? If not, why do blacks keep voting Democratic?

Muhammad Rasheed - Black people vote for the Democratic Party from tradition in the modern day. A notable trait of the ‘Assimilated Integrationist Token’ era in the last 50 yrs has been the total disenfranchisement of the Black community. Far less politically savvy as a group than we were before, the evidence suggests that the progressive trajectory that culminated into the dismantling of jim crow with the signing of the Civil Rights Act was deliberately sabotaged by party leadership and treacherous members of our own group.

Before the Civil Rights Act, Black activists knew the following tools were vital for political enfranchisement:
  1. Black Vote - The African-American ethnic group coming together across class and ideological lines to vote as ONE special interest political bloc.
  2. Black Political Agenda - A checklist of must-have items the Black community demanded from their government that their special interest group required for full U. S. Citizenship, Black Empowerment and Economic Inclusion.
  3. Black Political Representation - Hand-picked and-or hand-groomed officials, committed to the Black community’s interests, that the Black voter elected to office and held accountable to their agreement to achieving the items on the Black Political Agenda.
  4. Black Economic Boycott - An agreement between a significant number of the Black American special interest group to withhold their spending power from industry as a highly effective economic punishment when the government refuses to heed the demands of the Black community.
At the time the 1964 Civil Rights Act was signed, the politically astute Black community effectively utilized all of these points except #3, the Black Political Representation. Still high on the victory of jim crow’s removal, Black community leadership across a class and ideological lines ambitiously gathered to work out the plan for electing more pro-Black politicians to push the Black Political Agenda. They also formalized the Black Political Agenda.

After the meeting we find more Black politicians than ever, but without the Black Political Agenda, which was deliberately stripped and trashed by groups within the Black community itself, beholden to selfish outsiders traditionally hostile to Black interests. Today the original fire of the Black Empowerment Movement has been dampened by ineffective and even treacherous leadership from the political party that promised to help us get to where we longed to be. It grows more and more clear that unless we gather together and do it ourselves, we will continue to be abused and exploited by the dominant group.

Saturday, November 3, 2018

The 'Dive' Controversy in Context of Effortless Domination

Caricatured summary of the first prize fight between
Sonny Liston versus Muhammad Ali, and how the latter's
nigh-casual domination of the former champion is the
proper lens to judge whether Liston took a 'dive' in the sequel.

Mike Gonzales - Did Sonny Liston take a dive in his 2nd fight with Muhammad Ali?

Muhammad Rasheed - I’ve studied the Ali vs Liston II ‘dive’ controversy a lot over the years, and the one thing that baffles me about it is this:
What was supposed to have happened in the first fight that would make me think that Liston even needed to take a dive in the sequel?
Perhaps if the first fight was super close and Ali barely won a contested split decision or something similar, then the ‘dive’ rumors would actually make sense. But other than the ‘ointment in the eyes’ blip, the former Cassius Clay completely dominated Sonny Liston, dancing around him like the big man was standing still, each desperate counter-punch attempt catching nothing but the empty air where Ali used to be. Using his awkward, very non-traditional signature style, Ali made easy work of all of that previous generation’s fighters, and even if Liston had taken his brash young challenger as seriously as he should have and put in the gym work, it wouldn’t have gone any differently. Ali embarrassed Liston in that first fight, and if Liston was in top notch shape for the sequel, Ali was MORE so — he wasn’t giving up that belt.

So the idea that Sonny Liston ‘took a dive’ so he wouldn’t win—as if he stood more than a fluke puncher’s chance at all— is so divorced from the reality of the two competitors’ skill levels, it can never be more than just a silly rumor no matter how much the faux-controversy persists through the annals of boxing gossip legend.

Jeanne Pitt - That punch wouldn’t have knocked down a welterweight, of course he took a dive

Muhammad Rasheed - Ali had a 66% KO percentage over-all, which was much higher in those Cassius Clay years when he was calling the rounds (“Liston is great, but he’ll fall in eight!”). Even though he never had the reputation of a devastating knockout artist, the smooth ‘bee sting’ punching style Ali demonstrated was clearly deceptively harder than it looked from the outside. Watch how much Cleveland William’s head forcefully snaps back throughout that fight from jabs alone.

DECODED: Societal Aversion to Rapid Social Change

Cartoon satirizing the fake "progress" of societal change
when it comes to anti-racism policy and law.

Mike Lieberman - As a conservative, what bothers you about other conservatives?

Andrew Houston Vaughan - Quora Answer

Will Waalkes - @Andrew... So, what values do you see in the Conservative party that keeps you under that label?

Andrew Houston Vaughan - The value of the foundation of the United States as I believe that it is a system that does, at its heart, work best for the people.

I believe that rapid change is a mistake in government, and I'm concerned about the rapid social change happening right now in the US. I call myself a conservative because I want to conserve our laws and be less reckless.

I'm also a conservative in that I believe there should be a limit to government and power within that government. When it comes to freedom vs. security, I choose freedom, thus I call myself a conservative.

C Hunter Thorne - @Andrew... If a law or system is hurting its citizens (slavery, prohibition, Japanese internment, war on drugs), would your “slow change conservatism” apply then as well? Would you have done a slow roll-out over years to abolish slavery or repeal prohibition? Or would you favor ending the misery as fast as humanly possible?

Muhammad Rasheed - @Andrew... If the rapid change is what is actually best for the people, then we shouldn’t allow an over-loyal adherence to partisan ideology to keep that change from happening rapidly.

In the historic record, the only reason why conservatives didn’t want social change to happen rapidly, was so that their estates would be able to milk the slave economy for as much loot as possible before that gravy train was finally allowed to fall. Since the current system still very much continues to enrich a dominant racist aristocracy, I am deeply suspicious of any “rapid change is a mistake” sounding rhetoric coming from the direction of the right.

James Briggs - This the kind of racist message that Quora wants.

Muhammad Rasheed - What definition of ‘racist’ are you using here, James? I ask because your comment doesn’t yet compute. Please explain.

James Briggs - The picture is racist and you know it. Pretending that is not indicates that you aren’t acting in good faith. I beleive that the United States government is racist and its programs that are said to help blacks are known to weaken and enslave humans no matter who they are. The result of the polities are in line with what we know from behavioral science.

Muhammad Rasheed - Please recognize that we see the world from fundamentally different ways and I do not agree with you just as you do not agree with me. In order to aid me in understanding your viewpoint, please just answer my question. Thank you.

James Briggs - You understand my views point and I understand yours. No one is fooled when you play stupid. Thank you.

Muhammad Rasheed - Well, actually I don't understand your point since you are using the word "racist" in a way that directly conflicts with the facts of history.

Please be so kind as to define the term formally for the record as it is being used from your ideological perspective. Thank you.

James Briggs - If you were honest you would have defined racism. The fact that you didn’t prove you are playing games. Your picture shows a similar image of a black man in the same way the proslavery press did in the middle 1800s. You ridicule and demean blacks.

Muhammad Rasheed - I asked you to define it since you're the one that used the term when you responded to my answer. If you were honest you would have simply explained in straight talk exactly why you are triggered instead of ducking and dodging my reasonable request.

Please be so kind as to define the term "racist" formally for the record as it is being used from your ideological perspective. Thank you.

James Briggs - I told you that your picture racist so you know what I mean. The point is these images have been used in the past to justify the false idea of race and to promote slavery

Muhammad Rasheed - My picture is not racist just because it reminds you of anti-Black propaganda from the past. You are either confused by the image's attack on anti-racism using satire, or your definition of 'racist' is wildly different from my own causing a classic miscommunication glitch. All of this can be resolved simply by you being so kind as to provide your formal definition of the term in which I'll have the opportunity to correct during a teachable moment.

En garde.

Thursday, November 1, 2018

A Home for Our True Heart

Cartoon satirizing the fact that the Black American's true political party
was usurped by their traditional ideological enemy, forcing them
to try to reach their goals within the other rival party
with suspiciously limited success.

Trent Hopkinson - Is being politically left and being an atheist essentially "the same thing"?

Muhammad Rasheed - No. I’m politically left because that’s where my Black American ethnic group leans politically in general; they are traditionally a conservative, pro-business Judaeo-Christian class.

Remember, the left is composed of numerous special interest groups—many often ideologically opposed!—that are supposed to be working together as a unified political force to fight for social justice ideals to benefit the people over the moneyed elitist class. Perhaps it would make more sense for the traditionally anti-racism, but pro-religious and pro-capitalist Black American to vote Republican Party, but the pro-racism white conservative is currently squatting in our old home room party, and it doesn’t look very comfortable over there. To me it makes more sense for the Black American to finally unify across class and ideological lines to form a special interest group of their own under the Democratic Party where they already have equity built up, and push a focused, centrist Black political agenda with loyal, hand-picked or even hand-groomed representatives to achieve the long sought Black Empowerment, Economic Inclusion we need.

Sure we can technically do it as an independent African-American party, but would it make sense to start from scratch working harder to get up to a level we’re at now in the Democratic Party? I think we should build up from where we currently are as best strategy, using the ample party resources at our disposal now, instead of stepping backwards to zero first. I am willing to hear the counter-argument as to why it would make better sense to break off and form our own party though. Would it benefit us most to pay party fees to ourselves, for example? Does paying fees to the Democratic Party—a white-owned organization—actually represent yet more plunder of our communities, and an ultimately unnecessary loss of our legendary $1.4 trillion spending power?

Andy Heilveil - This is the first cogent reasoning I have seen for why Black Americans should stick with the Democratic party for the time being: “it makes more sense for the Black American to finally unify across class and ideological lines to form a special interest group of their own under the Democratic Party where they already have equity built up”

I do appreciate the relative-to-me conservative African American for voting along with us Progressives. Once we have countered the “Minority rule instead of Minority rights” GOP we can have civil arguments between us and negotiate over what the gov’t should do and how.

Wednesday, October 31, 2018

The Double Assassination of Malcolm X

Cartoon depicting the continuous working behind the scenes of the efforts to
sabotage the civil rights era Black Empowerment movement.

Michael McGrath - Was Malcolm X gay?

Muhammad Rasheed - Despite a lot of bloggers and even some Quorans' decision to accept the "Malcolm X was gay" claims of a 2005 article published in The Guardian, I am not convinced.

Considering the nature of how the pro-Black Empowerment figures and their movements were infiltrated and destroyed, combined with how "sexual deviancy" was perceived in the mainstream, I'm wondering why these accounts by these so-called witnesses should be taken as default truths that definitively happened.
"I want to be remembered as someone that was sincere even if I made mistakes, they were in sincerity. If I was wrong, I was wrong in sincerity. I can deal with a person that's wrong, as long as they are sincere." ~Al-Hajj Malik Al-Shabazz
Even though I understand that in today's progressive political climate we of the modern day accept that homosexuality and its lifestyle should no longer be demonized, it would seem that a reasonable person should have EVERY reason to doubt the validity of these claims made about Malcolm X considering the context of what was going on around him that led not only to his assassination, but to the dismantling of the pro-Black militant groups that his life and death directly inspired. To me it seems obvious that these claims were being made as a character assassination attempt—to counter the militancy-inspiring force of his martyrdom—that is now being "cleaned up" because of our newly pro-gay political clime. I think it is short-sighted and narrow-minded to take these claims at face value, and we should be less gullible and more critical in our assessment of what is presented to us.

Matthew James - Outstanding. I couldn’t agree more.

Friday, October 26, 2018

Paying to Play Indian: The Dawes Rolls and the Legacy of $5 Indians

"Iron Eyes" Cody, the Sicilian man famous
as the publicized face of Native Americans.
The Dawes Commission, established in 1893 to enforce the General Allotment Act of 1887 (or the Dawes Act), was charged with convincing tribes to cede their land to the United States and divide remaining land into individual allotments. The commission also required Indians to claim membership in only one tribe and register on the Dawes Rolls.

Article by Alysa Landry, originally published at on 27 Mar 2017.

Paying to Play Indian: The Dawes Rolls and the Legacy of $5 Indians | Dawes rolls rife with ‘opportunistic white men’ and early appropriation

It may be fashionable to play Indian now, but it was also trendy 125 years ago when people paid $5 apiece for falsified documents declaring them Native on the Dawes Rolls.

These so-called five-dollar Indians paid government agents under the table in order to reap the benefits that came with having Indian blood. Mainly white men with an appetite for land, five-dollar Indians paid to register on the Dawes Rolls, earning fraudulent enrollment in tribes along with benefits inherited by generations to come.

“These were opportunistic white men who wanted access to land or food rations,” said Gregory Smithers, associate professor of history at Virginia Commonwealth University. “These were people who were more than happy to exploit the Dawes Commission—and government agents, for $5, were willing to turn a blind eye to the graft and corruption.”

The Dawes Commission, established in 1893 to enforce the General Allotment Act of 1887 (or the Dawes Act), was charged with convincing tribes to cede their land to the United States and divide remaining land into individual allotments. The commission also required Indians to claim membership in only one tribe and register on the Dawes Rolls, what the government meant to be a definitive record of individuals with Indian blood.

The Curtis Act, passed in 1898, targeted the Five Civilized Tribes (Cherokee, Choctaw, Chickasaw, Creek and Seminole), forcing them to accept allotments and register on the Dawes Rolls. The two acts—which came during a “period of murky social context” after the Civil War when white and black men were intermarrying with Native American women, aimed to help the government keep track of “real” Indians while accelerating efforts to assimilate Indian people into white culture, Smithers said.

“By 1865, African Americans and white Americans were moving into the Midwest, into the Indian and Oklahoma territories, all vying for some patch of land they could call their own and live out their Jeffersonian view of independence,” he said. “The federal government poured a lot of effort and energy into the Dawes Commission, but at the same time it was very hard for both Native and American governments to keep track of who was who.”

The Dawes Commission set up tents in Indian Territory, said Bill Welge, director emeritus of the Oklahoma Historical Society’s Office of American Indian Culture and Preservation. There, field clerks scoured written records, took oral testimony and generated enrollment cards for individuals determined to have Indian blood.

That included authentic Indians, Welge said. But it also included lots of people with questionable heritage.

“Commissioners took advantage of their positions and enrolled people who had very minimal or questionable connections to the tribes,” he said. “They were not adverse to taking money under the table.”

“Now we have people who are white but who can trace their names back to the rolls used by tribal nations to ascertain who has rights as citizens,” he said. “That means we have white people who have the ability to vote at large; it means political rights; it means the potential to influence tribal policy on a whole range of issues; it means people have access to health care, education and employment. The implications are quite profound for people who got away with fraud.”

On the flip side, while non-Natives paid to play Indian, many authentic Indians who didn’t trust the government chose not to register with the Dawes Rolls at all, said Gene Norris, a genealogist at the Cherokee National Historical Society. That means people with legitimate claims to tribal enrollment and the benefits are now excluded.

“Native Americans are the only racial group defined by blood,” Norris said. “Even that was arbitrary. In the 1890s, siblings who talked to different commissioners emerged with different blood quantum. Because they didn’t apply together, some of them have different blood degrees.”

In short, the Dawes Rolls forever changed the way the federal government defined Indians—and, in many cases, the way Indians still define themselves.

In 1900, one woman registered on the rolls with 1/256 Cherokee blood, Norris said. Now, some enrolled members of the Cherokee Nation have as little as 1/8,196 Indian blood.

The Dawes Rolls—even now—are a murky and “very inaccurate” gauge of Indian citizenship, he said. In the 2000 Census, the number of people claiming Cherokee ancestry was three times that of official tribal enrollment.

“That’s what happens when the federal government established the rules, not the Natives,” he said.

Smithers has no estimate of the number of people who fraudulently registered on the Dawes Rolls—or who lay false claim to Indian citizenship now. But five-dollar Indians did not represent an isolated case of appropriation.

“What we had was simply white people claiming to be Indian,” he said. “They were early wannabes, just like we have today. Five-dollar Indian is just another term for that.”

Wednesday, October 24, 2018

FANTASY MATCH: Jon "Bones" Jones vs "Iron" Mike Tyson

The “street fight” part doesn’t really matter. Whether it was in the ring, the Octagon or in an alley setting, both of these guys would try their best to win.  But which of the two would have the edge?

Both Jon “Bones” Jones and “Iron” Mike Tyson are gifted athletes, and when both are in their prime, fight-ready fitness state they are “bad men.” The general rule is that a bad little man (Tyson) can never defeat a bad big man (Jones), but we know from the shocking outcome of The Fight of the Century that this rule isn’t always true. There are many other very relevant factors that can give the little bad man a real shot at winning. So what do we have here?

Jon has a lot more tools in his arsenal than Tyson, and can fight effectively using his long-limbs to keep his shorter opponent away which is what he has to do against Tyson. His weakness is that he does allow game opponents inside to tag him, which would be the kiss of death in a Tyson match. Would he allow his ego to let him stand and trade hands with Tyson, or would he fight the best strategy and keep Kid Dynamite at distance to finish with a take down + submission? One of Jones’ greatest strengths was demonstrated in the Belfort fight, when he powered through a potentially disastrous moment (that would have broken a lesser man) thought quick on his feet, and forced a victory with an impressive show of his champion’s heart.

The great advantage that a prime era Tyson would have would be his status as a professional boxer. At his peak, Tyson would have the potential ability to walk Jones down for a late KO just like Mayweather did to McGregor using his superior endurance skills alone. But that’s not how Tyson was trained to fight, and is not a strategy he’d likely entertain. Tyson was trained to take all of his risks early, to rush pass his taller opponent’s reach and bombard the head & body with lethal combos. If the taller opponent is able to effectively manage these attacks, Tyson has proven to check out of the fight and become discouraged and lethargic. This is Tyson’s great weakness, one that he’s never demonstrated the ability to overcome.

I would say that Jonny “Bones” Jones would be able to solve the Tyson puzzle and score the win.