Is society moving back to segregation?
Google recently announced that they are going to highlight black-owned businesses in search results so that people can shop according to race (see [creativebloq.com] ). As popularized by the controversial 2018 film, "Green Book", marking black-owned businesses hearkens back to the Jim Crow south where segregation of business patronization was normal and enforced. Do you see moves like Google's as a trend towards re-segregation or just trendy? Could intersectionality scores be used instead to target businesses to visit or boycott?
8
Be part of the movement!
Welcome to the community for those who value free speech, evidence and civil discourse.Create your free account
37 comments
Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.The following may be useful information concerning the topic of racial identity politics (not race, not racial identity, but racial identity politics):
Thomas Jefferson
Declaration of Independence
"he has waged cruel war against human nature itself, violating it's most sacred rights of life & liberty in the persons of a distant people who never offended him, captivating & carrying them into slavery in another hemisphere, or to incur miserable death in their transportation thither. this piratical warfare, the opprobrium of infidel powers, is the warfare of the CHRISTIAN king of Great Britain. determined to keep open a market where MEN should be bought & sold, he has prostituted his negative for suppressing every legislative attempt to prohibit or to restrain this execrable commerce: and that this assemblage of horrors might want no fact of distinguished die, he is now exciting those very people to rise in arms among us, and to purchase that liberty of which he has deprived them, & murdering the people upon whom he also obtruded them; thus paying off former crimes committed against the liberties of one people, with crimes which he urges them to commit against the lives of another."
That has to do with the use of group think to control the minds and actions (hearts and minds) of people so as to divide them, and conquer them, in nearly plain English.
Not on topic?
How about this:
"To emancipate all slaves born after passing the act. The bill reported by the revisors does not itself contain this proposition; but an amendment containing it was prepared, to be offered to the legislature whenever the bill should be taken up, and further directing, that they should continue with their parents to a certain age, then be brought up, at the public expence, to tillage, arts or sciences, according to their geniusses, till the females should be eighteen, and the males twenty-one years of age, when they should be colonized to such place as the circumstances of the time should render most proper, sending them out with arms, implements of houshold and of the handicraft arts, feeds, pairs of the useful domestic animals, &c. to declare them a free and independant people, and extend to them our alliance and protection, till they shall have acquired strength; and to send vessels at the same time to other parts of the world for an equal number of white inhabitants; to induce whom to migrate hither, proper encouragements were to be proposed. It will probably be asked, Why not retain and incorporate the blacks into the state, and thus save the expence of supplying, by importation of white settlers, the vacancies they will leave? Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties, and produce convulsions which will probably never end but in the extermination of the one or the other race."
Notes on the State of Virginia
by Thomas Jefferson, 1781
Specifically this:
"Deep rooted prejudices entertained by the whites; ten thousand recollections, by the blacks, of the injuries they have sustained; new provocations; the real distinctions which nature has made; and many other circumstances, will divide us into parties..."
How about a sound bite, if there are too many words:
"...will divide us into parties..."
Lynching parties?
Shopping parties?
There is a difference.
Josf-Kelley
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
1
This post could maybe use a "summing up" paragraph. Otherwise there are many who will miss the point of it. Just my two cents worth here. Take it or leave it.
It has been known for some time now (millennium) that deception is required to maintain crime under the authority of (fake) law.
A clue that clues the victims in on the con game is when the criminals with badges order the digging of graves, the jumping in of graves, and the order to keep digging until the subject finds salvation.
Does that sum it up?
@Josf-Kelley I thought so.
"That the question was not whether, by a declaration of independence, we should make ourselves what we are not; but whether we should declare a fact which already exists:
That, as to the people or Parliament of England, we had always been independent of them, their restraints on our trade deriving efficacy from our acquiescence only, and not from any rights they possessed of imposing them; and that, so far, our connection had been federal only, and was now dissolved by the commencement of hostilities:
That, as to the king, we had been bound to him by allegiance, but that this bond was now dissolved by his assent to the late act of Parliament, by which he declares us out of his protection, and by his levying war on us a fact which had long ago proved us out of his protection, it being a certain position in law, that allegiance and protection are reciprocal, the one ceasing when the other is withdrawn:" First Congress United States of America (back when it was a federation of independent states) 1776.
Further expressions of the same principles:
Bonding Code:
"9.2 - Escalation
Further:
A law enforcement officer will lose his bond if he oppresses a citizen to the point of civil rebellion when that citizen attempts to obtain redress of grievances (U.S. constitutional 1st so-called amendment).
When a state, by and through its officials and agents, deprives a citizen of all of his remedies by the due process of law and deprives the citizen of the equal protection of the law, the state commits an act of mixed war against the citizen, and, by its behavior, the state declares war on the citizen. The citizen has the right to recognize this act by the publication of a solemn recognition of mixed war. This writing has the same force as the Declaration of Independence. It invokes the citizen's U.S. constitutional 9th and 10th so-called amend guarantees of the right to create an effective remedy where otherwise none exists."
THE COMMERCIAL LIEN RIGHT AND THE MILITARY LIEN RIGHT
"In American history, the Declaration of Independence served the legal purpose of making a Solemn Recognition of Mixed War, which is a Notice of Military Lien Right, a warning of No Trespass, an assertion that any killing or taking of human life necessary for the protection of the legal remedies of the common citizen is being done, in the immediate situation described in the Solemn Recognition or Notice, not as murder, but as lethal self-defense of the commercial and social remedy against the cited domestic enemy or enemies. The Declaration of Independence is the legal model or format for the construction of the Solemn Recognition of Mixed War and the Notice of Military Lien Right."
If the slaves are so completely brian-washed (now called Stockholm Syndrome) as to be at each other's throats enforcing the order to dig the hole to hell side-by-side in the same deep living grave, then the few (and fewer) still aware of the same basic principles of morality (it is not good to lie, cheat, steal, rob, rape, torture, murder, and mass murder your way to the top of the heap in a self-made hell) are seen as abnormal, aberrations, like a disease of some mysterious origin, a viral infection that must be wiped out immediately if not sooner.
Not segregation, segregation would be beneficial to both whites and Asians. What the “powers that be” want is a race based class system where whites will primarily be vilified and forced to give up the majority of their incomes and property to blacks as a form of “reparations”. Blacks wouldn’t fare any better under a truly segregated society than they fare in purely black African countries. They depend on the productivity of whites.
Andyman
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
10
Dude I called this like 3 months ago. Next their going to start pushing for anti gentrification. Preventing white people from buying homes or opening up businesses in minority neighborhoods. Just Blockbusting in fancier clothing. Intersectionality fixes the problem with Marxism that relies on class Warfare. People don't identify with that class, they do identify with race. And if they don't there's always something on the intersection of scale that they will convince them that they are oppressed and turn them against them their oppressors. Bam, you got class Warfare
Shiosakai
Level 6
Aug 3, 2020
9
Anybody bother asking black businesses how they feel about being excluded from the white buyer class? Personally, I’ve never spent money on anything based on the race of the seller. But if someone wants to tell me my money isn’t welcome because of MY race, that’s fine with me. Suck wind, bigot.
And please spare me the gasps and howls of dismay, screaming, “That’s not what it’s about!”
Yes. It is. And if you pretend otherwise, you are not only a race hustler, but you are a liar.
Edgework
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
7
Several polls now have Pres. Trump in the 40% range with Blacks. I dismissed it when it was only one poll, but there have now been three that have had similar results.
I have seen videos of black business owners begging rioters and even protesters to stop, because it is making all black people look crazy and bad, and most people of any race are pretty much normal.
Ours was, is, and always will be a multi-cultural town. We have over 50 languages spoken here and people from all over the globe call it "home." We started as a group of farmers, ranchers, and oil patch. In other words, we're redneck to the core. However, that being noted, no one here gives a rats-azz where you came from, what your roots are, what color you are, who you love, or which god you worship. We will and do support shop and store owners who are friendly, carry good products, have decent pricing, and treat their families and customers with dignity and respect. But that's my town.
PamelaSteele
Level 7
Aug 3, 2020
6
I see it more like purchasing CO2 offsets for the radical environmentalists or purchasing indulgences from the ancient Roman Catholic church. People are looking for forgiveness and trying to fabricate ways to earn it. I didn't realize how guilty those on the left felt about their racism. Hopefully they can be reeducated before they do even more damage.
RobBlair
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
7
Google needs to be splintered into a thousand fragments.
Search for “black inventors” and check the images.
Now search “white inventors.”
They changed their motto from “Don’t Be Evil,” to the culturally appropriated “Do the Right Thing.” Clearly, Steve Jobs was right. The old motto was bullshit and the new one simply announced how pure and woke they are.
Edgework
Level 8
Aug 4, 2020
5
Wow! Eyes wide open!
Are business owners signing up for this black business promotion thing or is google just going to make sure businesses that are owned by blacks will rank above everyone else? The irony of this anti-racist BS is mind-blowing.
Lilu
Level 5
Aug 4, 2020
5
I was thinking the same thing. Grouping a race together as if they all think that their buisness should be promoted based on skin color seems...racist?
Lilu:
@saramarylop3z It's only racist if it promotes whites above others, apparently.
Well, I think the most reasonable response would be to refuse to do business with people or businesses that indulge in this type of “racial profiling”.
Much the same way I would refuse to do business with a business or people who hung up a sign, “Whites Only”.
There are already several programs out there that promote one alleged “minority” over “non minorities” ... “Woman Owned”, “Minority Owned” ... wherein they are given favorable tax rates, priority for contracts, favorable placement ... truly, the list is endless ... and EACH is more egregious than the last.
This particular move by the Left is simply an extremely obvious move to break apart Our Society even further and quicker than it has already.
The People and Businesses that engage in creating these things should be Made to Suffer ... should be removed from Our “Favored Business” List ... should be driven into bankruptcy.
Personally, I think the People who come up with ideas ... who implement ideas ... like this, should be dragged out and Publicly Horsewhipped ...
mostly because I think Shooting Them would be a bit extreme
Bay0Wulf
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
6
It is going to create segregation, as more and more shops will identify under this new genre for different reasons. What are the parameters for "black-owned"? Is it skin color? Do Arabic and East Indians also qualify? Will Google have an Asian highlight....maybe ....yellow? Perhaps Google could just place white-owned businesses at the very bottom of their search engine algorithm, unless they pay for advertising?
This virtue signalizing, and cancel culture entitlement is going to create generational damage on our societies. You wait and see.
Sensrhim4hizvewz
Level 8
Aug 4, 2020
3
It will solidify the false narrative of Black Liberation Philosophy. It can only confirm the misplaced and invalid bias that Blacks and some Whites have toward the dynamics of Black / White relationship particularly here in USA but also all around the globe.
I would suggest you take a long look at what is going on in South Africa regarding the matter of Black / White hostility.
All of this is profoundly antithetical to the very principles that informed the founding documents of United States.
iThink
Level 9
Aug 3, 2020
5
I tip my hat to the Admin for selecting this topic. Good one. Sincerely.
I would like to approach this in terms of the advertising dollars and ad placement. Black supremacy and black privilege in the marketplace. So NOW - The cost of competing for FURTHER limited ad space is tantamount to affirmative action in advertising.
The cost of advertising for 'other' businesses will eventually turn into - "Now we need a space for Mexican, Indian, Asian, LGBTQ, etc. owned businesses.' - Haven't we already seen that pattern before?
Will these people enjoy 'automatic' privileges with regard to YELP and other platforms as well as 'Google Reviews' that will make it illegal to write bad reviews of these businesses and call those reviews 'racist?'
These are all very important questions and I think we can all see where this is going.
What this signals to me is pretty much the same thing that all of the other black supremacy and black privilege initiatives are indicating - that there is a different set of rules, laws, business practices, etc for privileged people of color than there is for everybody else.
RAZE
Level 7
Aug 4, 2020
3
RAZE:
To put it simply, the cost of advertising for everyone else is going to go up because of this.
RAZE:
Start using DuckDuckGo - it has gotten better and as other people have commented, GOOGLE has gotten much worse in terms of producing the search results that you are looking for and instead show you what they want you to see. The gaslighting in society continues on through Google. Try doing a search for a negative article about Hillary Clinton and the search results produce a negative article about Donald Trump. 'History' will favor the search results that back up the narrative, not the truth.
This must be the only country on earth where the majority is subservient to minorities. The minorities get a free welfare ride, then can never get enough.
johnlondon
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
4
Ultimately create racism in both directions. Any plan that advocates the identification of race, will ultimately generate racism.
BaldPrivilege
Level 2
Aug 4, 2020
2
Jim Crow laws were even more about greed than they were about race.
The point of these laws was to disallow people, particularly non-bigoted people of ALL races, from CHOOSING to do business with the other races.
This point is often lost in the history discussions of the Jim Crow topic.
If I were voting for Jim Crow Laws, I would be voting not so much for black people to be disallowed from doing business with me, but for black people not to be able to do business WITH YOU.
Most normal business people, even in the south, were of the Fuck You, Money is Money, opinion. THAT is why such laws were passed.
Those that didn't want to do business with Blacks also wanted to make sure YOU couldn't either.
This point was first brought to my attention by Prof. Walter Williams over 20 years ago, thus correcting a (probably deliberate) omission by my Marxist public school education.
curvycom
Level 7
Aug 4, 2020
2
Jim Crow... Democrat DNA
@Edgework It's amazing that the democrats have been able to successfully whitewash their racist and bigoted past supporting all the worst aspects of our history. Slavery, Apartheid, Socialism/Communism. They supported it all, and now are engaging in the newest form of bigotry in Marxist Intersectionalism.
Also @tonkotsu is my favorite type of ramen. I actually make that kind of broth sometimes. And I've invented a pretty good substitute for it if you don't want to boil bones for three days!!
what’s that substitute?@tonkotsu I posted it for you in "curvycom" Group at "A five minute substitute for Tonkotsu Broth:
I think it will further strengthen racial tensions but will probably benefit neither race in the long run... it's crazy that some people don't see right through the absurdity that is increased division in the name of equality. LOL
TheRealAlyZ
Level 6
Aug 3, 2020
3
Business should be carried out in relation to products or services rendered, not race/color of one's skin. The move will only seek to enhance what is being fought by targeting another race. It's counter productive. It simply won't help break the barriers.
Anthony001
Level 4
Aug 3, 2020
3
The thing is that most folks don't care who owns what. Patrons care about good prices, good service and general positive contribution to society. By tagging a business as above others JUST because of their skin color or sexual orientation or whatever tends to turn many off and can actually LOSE the company business! While I don't hold with everything Malcolm X said I do believe he was right when he said that blacks should not beg at the white man's table. If the white man doesn't want them there then go somewhere they are wanted. Speak with your money. This goes for everyone in everything. If you are not wanted somewhere go to another place. You will be surprised how fast people will turn around when their is at stake!
rizzella
Level 4
Aug 8, 2020
2
There have been signs on the far left of this regression to segregation. There have been college campuses with race based safe spaces. There were instances of segregation in Seattle's CHOP zone. Seattle's CHOP was also asking for race based Healthcare. So there is a definite effort so segregate blacks. I believe the effort is in good faith, but regardless it should be concerning whenever opportunity is only afforded in any space only on the grounds of race.
Social interaction is a necessary human condition as hate grows in isolation without examples to disprove it's lies.
Last1Standing
Level 2
Aug 4, 2020
2
Marking businesses as black-owned will...
Offer a choice to people who prefer to know the color of the skin of the people they then contact, having that information that they require to make that choice.
What if the information is false?
Someone wanting to contact people of a specific skin color encounter information that claims that the people being contacted are in fact of the specific skin color stated in the MEDIA, but the MEDIA is willfully false, misleading, and the use of the MEDIA turns out to be the opposite of what the user of the MEDIA intended.
See (perhaps):
[slug.com]
Choice 1:
Create racisim against black-owned businesses
That choice is full of possible problems such as how black are the black owners, and exactly how much of what they claim to own do they actually own? What if they are very black, but they work for white people who loaned them money, property, and the pay-back on the loan is to march to a non-black tune?
Choice 2:
Benefit black owned businesses as non-black owned businesses suffer
That choice falls into the possible Zero-Sum-Game fallacy, where there is a specific limited number of possible outcomes (evil or lesser evil) when markets are adjusted by one single change. A move of a number of customers from Market A to Market B, by that Zero-Sum-Game Dogma, MUST cause the following result, and no other possible result, such as people find happiness doing what they choose to do, rather than what they are told to do without questioning the orders from above - no other result other than either evil or lesser evil - is possible in that BOX made of falsehood.
Choice 3:
Do little either way
That is as open ended and as ambiguous a "choice" as is asking someone to supply the right size parts to fit into the machine, doing so without any clear and accurate measure of the size of the parts. Give me a gear for my watch. OK, what size? A little one!
Josf-Kelley
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
2
Regarding zero-sum... do you think the racial labeling will bring out shoppers who normally would have not bought the things that the labeled stores are selling? If not, then it would seem zero-sum is in effect, no?
The economic philosophy behind it is not Zero sum but economies of scale, where a black economic base can increase its customers by trading beyond "its own kind".
Nobel laurette Gary Becker showed how this would function in his PhD.
The question though is how far this would be pushed towards a white boycott and then visa versa.
"Regarding zero-sum... do you think the racial labeling will bring out shoppers who normally would have not bought the things that the labeled stores are selling? If not, then it would seem zero-sum is in effect, no?"
I think that it takes 2 to complete the intended "racial labeling" when that is the intended goal of the sender. People have to read into "racial labeling" in order for "racial labeling" to become "racial labeling."
If I am Irish and I read a "racial labeling" effort by someone claiming to be Irish, I would probably form a negative opinion of that form of communication, so I would not add to the number of people being brought out to shop by that effort to accomplish Irish "racial labeling."
Even if the question was rigorously studied with extreme care to remain within the very narrow limits of science (the scientific method), I don't think that the "play is worth the candle." Another apt phrase might be pushing on a string.
If the idea is to cause division among races, then there are tried and true methods of doing so, involving agent provocateurs. One early example of this I found in an old book titled The Lost State of Franklin, and in that book people hell bent on profiting from very fertile land occupied by the local Indians, hatched their plan to hire sociopaths to dress up as Indians and pay them to slaughter white Settlers nearby. The plan worked to help finance a greater expense of hiring, enlisting, and inciting the slaughter of the Indians in a false flag event where the Settlers are fooled into believing that the Indians were responsible for the slaughter of the Settlers.
Race has nothing to do with it, other than a color or flavor of the routine use of deception, threat, and violence (criminal means) to achieve criminal goals.
If instead the idea is to increase market share in free markets, and the means to that end is thought to be an advertisement of the skin color of the sellers, so as to attract more buyers, then I think the pushing on the string principle may apply here, as I think it is much better to just ask people what they want, and then supply what is asked for, and then "pull on the string," by asking for feedback: "How can the supply be improved?"
What is being sold?
Is racism being sold?
Is free stuff being sold?
Who exactly (or what constitutes) the targeted market?
Only people of a certain race?
That isn't a zero sum game, that is a goal to supply to a specific market of people, and the ones who want to supply to reach that goal have specific boundaries that define their chosen market.
Again, since I am Irish, I can attempt to fit this type of question into a practical scenario.
Can I sustain my exclusive Irish Marketing Business? If not, then can I get what I want (exclusive Irish Marketing) by expanding my business to also include Germans, since I am both Irish and German?
I can't even ask that question of myself, because I have no reason, there is no logic to, racism, in my thinking. Why would anyone start thinking in terms of excluding people based upon race? What is the point?
I don't get it.
I will attempt to read the question again:
"Regarding zero-sum... do you think the racial labeling will bring out shoppers who normally would have not bought the things that the labeled stores are selling? If not, then it would seem zero-sum is in effect, no?"
Perhaps there is a miscommunication concerning what is or is not a Zero-Sum Fallacy, or Con Game. I may not be doing my part in the work required to convey the intended message effectively.
Possible Data Before Racial Labeling:
X number of people buying y number of products from supplier
Possible Data After Racial Labeling:
X ( a ) number of people buying Y ( b ) number of products from supplier
How would someone know what actually causes the changes from before to after the effort to Advertise the Race of the suppliers?
I can think of 10 reasons quickly, and I'm only one person, so there are many, many, many possible reasons for people to decide to buy from or not buy from a supplier whose advertising turns from not advertising the Race of the supplier to a new Marketing tactic of advertising the Race of the supplier.
In your question you suppose that there is no affect associated with the change in Market Strategy from non-Race identity to Race identity, and suppose 100 people were asked to explain their market choices particular to the products sold by the Race Identity Supplier.
50 people say It does not matter to me, 25 of those bought something, 25 did not buy something.
50 other people say it did matter, 25 of those bought something, 25 did not buy something.
It is not a Zero-Sum-Game-Fallacy if there are only so many people in the market wanting to buy that stuff. That would be a limited Market, like I don't know, soiled underwear. There is (from what I heard) a market for soiled underwear, but it is limited compared to the clean air, clean water, nutritious food, cost effective insurance, and Personal Computer Markets.
How about the sunlight market? That can be seen as a Zero-Sum-Game (but not a fallacy) given the available information that eventually the Sun is going to burn out. All those who want Sunlight are going to be left without it, unless some of us figure out how to move to another Solar System.
I really don't know what race has to do with any of this, other than it being the goal: to cause racism.
People will buy the cheapest goods and services in the long run.
Buying everything Chinese hurt our own economies and jobs, however we would rather buy $5 t shirt and $100 shoes made by forced labour than support our local economy.
People may support race based businesses for a short while, while it is trendy and then buy the cheapest when nobody is looking.
Hanno
Level 8
Aug 3, 2020
2
Hanno ... here’s an odd but completely true story ...
I had only recently started seeing a Chinese Girl who worked during the day in the same hardware company as I and then, worked a few hours at another company ... a clothing manufacturer ... nearby.
One evening I stopped there to pick her up to catch dinner before she went home.
She was doing detailing on garments ... shirts ... and I noticed that the shirt labels being put in in one batch said “Made in China” and another batch said “Made in Bangladesh”.
Me, being perpetually nosey, asked her if the shirts weren’t being made there in that shop.
She answered that, Yes ... couldn’t I see ...?
So I asked, Why then, do the labels say “Made in ...” when they were being made in NYC, USA?
She shushed me and told me “don’t ask these question” (she was still struggling with english).
Within seconds a man showed up and asked her a question in Chinese ... and they had a short conversation.
He wanted to know what I was asking. When he found out he was concerned that I would make problems but she assured him I would not ... that I was only a very curious guy ...
He asked me if I really wanted to know why and, when I said I did, this is what he told me ...
“If We make these shirts in the USA and sell them for even just $5, if there’s EVER any kind of problem with the shirt, people will make a Big Problem ... Make Bad Trouble ... send Letters and Phone Calls and ... We could sell the shirts “Made in USA” for $25 with no problem except those problems. So we “make” the shirt to say “Made in China” ... or Someplace Else and sell the shirts for $15. As long as the shirt is not “Made” here, people don’t care if there’s maybe some problem ... they Expect Problem so, if No Problem its Great Deal ... if Get a Problem its No Big Deal and they just throw away the cheap shirt.
The company actually took a smaller profit on a perfectly serviceable shirt to avoid customer liability and hassles.
Recent Visitors 158
Photos 127 More
Posted by Admin Does teaching "white guilt" also cultivate a "white pride" backlash?
Posted by Admin Is it time to take a knee on the Superbowl?
Posted by Admin Why not equality right now?
Posted by Admin How's Biden doing?
Posted by Admin How many good friends do you have from other political tribes?
Posted by Admin What did Trump do, if anything, to incite violence?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Is free speech dead?
Posted by Admin Under what time and circumstance is the use of violence warranted?
Posted by Admin Now what?
Posted by Admin What do you expect to be achieved by this week's pro-Trump DC rally?
Posted by Admin What did you learn in 2020?
Posted by Admin Should pedophiles be allowed to have "child" sex robots?
Posted by Admin Do you have a "line in the sand" regarding political or social change?
Posted by Admin Should big tech firms hire more Blacks and Hispanics?