>>And if those "ideas" and "actions" are foul? So be it eh?
>>
>>http://www.okayplayer.com/dcforum/DCForumID1/16978.html
>>
>>Defend that.
>
>I think I did. Had you read the posts you would have seen
>it.

You did a piss poor job of defending Easterman's jew baiting. That is why I pointed it out. I hoped you would do a better job if given a second chance.

>>Everytime I see a thread that you've started, I know I can
>>expect to see your written condemnation of right-wing
>>actions.
>>LOL.
>
>Why should I condemn them if I agree with them?

That is what makes you an Uncle Tom. America's right wing has sold blacks out twice in America's history, yet you still run interference for them, all the while claiming to be some kind of libertarian.

>
>As I said, it's the ideas that I support, not the people
>themselves.
>
>As for the leftist hypocrisy, the sentiment is quite evident
>on this board against so-called Eurocentric behavior and
>Americanism,

You weren't clear in your statements. You stated that "the left" despised whites. Get your ad homs straight if you are going to have a debate.

>to the point that if you are white and espouse
>ideas opposite to socialist "radicalism", you are considered
>evil.

Socialist Radicalism? You sure do play fast and loose with the terms don't you?

>The same is true of blacks who disagree with leftist
>proposals and agendas, only they are considered "Uncle
>Toms".

Considering the fact that "the left" or what passes for it is the reason America has been as progressive as it has, I can understand the sentiment. The right represents the status quo, whatever that may be. From slavery, to Jim Crow, the right has defended the status quo tooth and nail. Combine that with the betrayal of blacks by the right at crucial moments in history and you might gain an understanding of the vitriol directed at blacks who are apologists for these people.

House nigger. Uncle Tom. Sellout.

Ugly Words but not inaccurate given the long, hard struggle of blacks for equality. At every turn, there were blacks who made appeals for gradualism and accomodations to the dicates of those in power.

>Of course, you should be able to read the mess on this board
>for yourself...but here's a few examples:

I'll address your "evidence" later.

Now we get to the crux of your arguments:

>But look at the ones on television and print who lead this
>mess and whom these folks get their "information" from:
>
>Amy Goodman, Democracy Now (what a misnomer): white.
>
>Greg Palast, "independent" journalist (another misnomer):
>white.
>
>Michael Moore, independent filmaker and author: white.
>
>Noam Chomsky, linguist and one of the top anti-american
>scholars in the world: white.

You sure are a warped soul. What a shame.

1. As I said before, the movement for equality and justice has been multiracial for a long time. You name three prominent liberal figures as evidence that blacks are being led around by the nose by "white pied pipers". Nevermind the fact that the strugle racial equality is not foremost area of work of any of the individuals whom you listed nor has it EVER been the exclusive domain of black thinkers. Go read a history book or two. Look up Tom Paine, John Brown and John Weseley for starters, and then get a clue.

2. There are plenty of black progressives and leftists that advocate the same ideas. Too many to list in fact. When choosing ideas, one doesn't oft look at the color of the person who produced it, only the quality of the idea and the agenda of those who would endorse it. You should know that.

>And it was the same way with leftist organizations back in
>the day, as the NAACP was headed by white people and back by
>white European socialists.

Headed? So Ida Wells and W.E.B Dubois were white? Somebody call Encyclopedia Africana! There's been a grievous mistake! There IS such a thing as a COALITION you know.

No, as I said earlier, the struggle for equality has been multiracial for a long time. That the NAACP was started by blacks AND whites reflects that. Learn to read son.

The fact that some of the people who have been opposed to white supremacy have been white proves nothing.

Oh and I DARE you to try to indict all socialists as some kind of evil cabal. You don't want to play that game with me sonny.

>Noone "owns" ideas. But someone can own and control the
>movements, the rallies, and the propaganda that comes as a
>result of it.

So who OWNED the civil rights movement?

The abolistionist movement?

The movement for American Independence?

>The fact is, many organizations speak disdain about
>Eurocentricism and white people, then go turn around and
>follow those same white people they claim to despise and
>want to stop.

Many?

Which organizations?

Names please, and don't forget to show that the organizations have a stated anti-white agenda which would preclude them recieving any help whatsoever from whites.

Follow this by showing how they follow "whites".

This oughta be a hoot.

>Maybe they are the ones who are the real
>Toms.

Awww, I think widdle expertise is projecting.

No. Toms are blacks who are servile to white supremacy. That blacks and whites have been able to come together to resist white supremacy does not mitigate the crimes of the Uncle Tom. It just make him look like an even bigger fool.