>I'm not saying this. Maybe you just typed it wrong. I'm saying >if you are a victim you are going to feel a certain way about >the person who victimized you, you can call it hate or >whatever. But if you like detective shows, you look at the >person who commits the crime, figure out that person's motive. >Like if you start a fire, you have to expect smoke, why was >the fire set is the more important question.
Yes I did type it the wrong way round!!! But your analogy plugs into my very belief that you can't address 'black' issues without looking at 'white' motivation. This is crude because it presupposes that all blacks are subservients and 'whites' masters; which I'm sure you will agree is untrue. However, how can you hope to solve 'black' issues without making evaluations of his 'white' nemesis? And if you choose to do this you surely take a liberty as a black thinker, the very liberty you seek to ban the white thinker from taking.