The regulars creep each other out.

Having told this story, my agenda on this thread is almost done.

I say "almost" because this thread started out under the guise of being created to meet Hamilton's needs.

It is not a guise.

Hamilton, I think you are funny most of the time, but in many instances I feel your humor is perceived as unwelcome in the context of some very intense conversations, and -yes- insensitive to the degree that some perceive you as being racist.

Although I am among those people who perceive your humor in this manner, I do not claim to know your intent.

Homeowner said it very clearly on this thread.
http://brooklynian.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=58921&start=45

homeowner wrote: I happen to agree with MHA regarding Hamilton's less than sterling history of racial sensitivity on this site.

I am saying it again here.

....as you know, you may proceed in any way you wish.

Hamilton, since I created this thread for you, I think two votes should be required to lock it: Yours and mine.

I vote "for locking it"

Hamilton, what say you?

I've never met you, and this isn't "personal". I'd be glad to meet you at the much loved Farrell's anytime. Just PM me.

WCW called it, this thread was written in a manner that it would solicit the "misunderstandings", and -of course- it did. Isn't the internet, complete with its lack of intonation, fun?

Hmmm.

MHA, I certainly get your point, but I think my comments will be lost if I make them with reference to you in light of some of your past comments.

So, I'll try to speak in generalities. Basically, anyone who is not part of the mainstream is accused of being somehow against the mainstream, whether they are or not. Giant leaps!

Some examples:
Lesbians are accused of hating men.
Vegans hate omnivores
Amish hate everyone who uses technology.
All male organizations hate women

....when actually all the groups frequently want to do is spend some quality time with folks who share common interests.

....One can want to help a specific group of people without having any feelings (positive or negative) toward other groups.

Some members of the "uninvited" always think its about them.

And, of course, some members of the "isolating group" try to co-opt the mission of the overall group. Sometimes, this takes the form of "we don't have any people of x type in our group because we hate them". Effective groups quickly strip such people of the microphone, because their message is not at all productive to building up the group's members. ....Tearing down others just distracts from the ability to "empower" one's own group.

Let's get off to a good start:
1. Your perceptions of why I started this thread are absolutely correct.

2. Although others have jumped to conclusion that you are "racist" and continue to do so, I have simply consistently asked for you to clarify your statements. I would not bother having this discussion with you if I had reached the conclusion that you were some ignorant fool. (I am having this discussion....)

Now, let's get back to the subject at hand: politics.

My post above was in response to yours. You wrote above:

His calling Malcolm X a racist astounds me. He obviously does not know his history, or even bothered to see Spike Lee's movie.

Whynot's response:

.....Basically, anyone who is not part of the mainstream is accused of being somehow against the mainstream, whether they are or not. Giant leaps!

Some examples:
Lesbians are accused of hating men.
Vegans hate omnivores
Amish hate everyone who uses technology.
All male organizations hate women

....when actually all the groups frequently want to do is spend some quality time with folks who share common interests.

....One can want to help a specific group of people without having any feelings (positive or negative) toward other groups.

Some members of the "uninvited" always think its about them.

And, of course, some members of the "isolating group" try to co-opt the mission of the overall group. Sometimes, this takes the form of "we don't have any people of x type in our group because we hate them". Effective groups quickly strip such people of the microphone, because their message is not at all productive to building up the group's members. ....Tearing down others just distracts from the ability to "empower" one's own group.

You now write:

YOU want to criticize ME for being separatist, and to insinuate that I am a part of some 'isolating group', as if somehow people coalescing amongst themselves is some sort of crime? Well, I won't do that. Whitefolks like you seem to think that the world should look like the way YOU want it to look.

This isn't about "me" or "you", but if you re-read my post you will find that there is no criticism of being a separatist.

In fact I argue that if you are going to truly empower the people you choose to be "citizens of your nation", you should focus on building them up as opposed to focusing on other group's opinion of you, or on tearing their traditions and institutions down.

Let's speak in the abstract:

Leaders of aspiring nations have a lot to do in a very short period of time. If a new nation has the goal of empowering societies most oppressed, it certainly has its work cut out for it. As a result, it may not be wise for its leaders to waste time and energy making enemies outside of the group.

The world exists of all sorts of groupings, and we are fortunate enough to live in a society where groupings of all varieties seem to exist. However, when a group becomes too different from the mainstream, some people outside the group are quick to assign them negative attributes ("cults", etc.) and fear their existance. Such reactions are most frequently seen in outsiders who have a strong affinity for the dominant group, because they feel it is being somehow threatened, or their role as a cultural leader is being called into question.

Yes, there are many examples of police departments and others immediately assuming that any such groups are harmful to their members and the public.

----MOVE comes immediately to mind: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOVE -------

In this instance, the authorities over reacted to the degree that they literally bombed an occupied home, yet have never been held accountable for their willful disregard of the residents.

But, on the otherhand, there are also many such groups that do a tremendous service to their membership, as well as the community. ...such groups are often organized on the basis of race, politics and religion.

Wiki provides a ready, if not always comprehensive, resource:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_active_separatist_movements_in_North_America

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Separatism

Let's not discount the racial history of this country, or its ongoing religious and political persecution. Instead, let's focus on the work that is involved in creating a separtist society, despite the known risks.

In otherwords, "How --within the current environment of the United States, or even "world"-- could a much needed refuge and power base could be built?"

In order to be successful, the leader will need not only to focus on instances of past and present threats but also on opportunities. As with all political movements, their success will be directly related to their outlook, and the manner in which they motivate themselves to overcome obstacles.

Nationbuilding is incredibly rewarding. Even within the context of a larger opposed culture, it can bring people together and instill in them a sense of pride and shared values. In the pursuit of efficiency, the successes and methods of other groups are often utilized.

While this discussion of Separtism 101 has covered the basics, it is important to understand other risks that are inherent in creating a distinct culture within a larger one....

For example, although it may seem oxymoronic, people need help creating a separtist nation. Leaders should consult the library. It has good pretty books on the subject. There is also the internet.

Successful Separtists often find it worthwhile talk to experts in the field of community organizing, political science and sociology. Once the leader builds those human connections, he/she may finds it is easier.

Sadly, at its extreme, Separtism brings an inherent risk of in-fighting between its most committed members. The infighting is often accompanied by name calling and generalizations, wherein one or more of the parities paints the other as a polar opposite.

The method of lumping people together vaires. Sometimes it is by race. Other times by musical tastes.

...but the end result is the same, when one lumps together potential allies with known or perceived enemies, communication stops and potentially great nations fail.

Fine. I'll turn off the Carpenters.

Dude, it's like you were watching me thru some weird messed up glasses that blended me together with naive people. You creep me out.