Thoughts and Opinions - the "buy black 'movement'"

Print Page | Close Window

the "buy black 'movement'"

Printed From: Tippmann Paintball
Category: News And Views
Forum Name: Thoughts and Opinions
Forum Description: Got something you need to say?
URL: http://www.tippmannsports.com/forum/wwf77a/forum_posts.asp?TID=181737
Printed Date: 02 February 2026 at 11:25pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.04 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: the "buy black 'movement'"

Posted By: arcticmonkey
Subject: the "buy black 'movement'"
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:02am

So I don't know if anybody has heard about this new "buy black 'movement'" starting up in Chicago but I think it is rediculus so I want to see everyones thoughts on it.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,519965,00.html - Here's an article I found

tl;dr:

Basically a black couple in Chicago decided to stop patronizing any stores OR services not owned or operated specifically by African Americans. They complain that white people control the market because ever since they were allowed to shop in 'white stores' they went there instead of 'black stores' that could provide them with better business, but because of the 'white stores' now cannot flourish.

Highlighted quotes from the story:

"When we were a community of black folks who could not go to the white stores, our community of black stores flourished," Brown said. "When we were given the opportunity to go into the white store, it was like nothing else mattered anymore and we wanted to go to the white store, regardless of what the black store provided. We could have the same or better products if we supported (black businesses) in the same way."

"We've still got that 'the white man's water is colder' mentality," he said. "We can't take us for granted. When we go to our establishments, it's almost like we're doing a favor. That ought to be a given for us."

"It's like, my people have been here 400 years and we don't even have a Walgreens to show for it."

-------------

Replies:

Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:04am

Yeah! Lets screw saving money just because I feel like being a racist!! Woo!!!!!!

-------------

Posted By: arcticmonkey
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:06am

Linus wrote:

Yeah! Lets screw saving money just because I feel like being a racist!! Woo!!!!!!

haha, I know right! I mean they waste even more money by driving way out of the way to find 'black businesses'

-------------

Posted By: Cedric
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:09am

I've only been buying black for years now.

-------------

Posted By: Kayback
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:29am

Aren't African Americans a minority? By simple demographics there should be more stores and services owned by whiteys ?

If black stores were good, everyone would shop there wouldn't they? Surely thats a better plan than replying on a niche market to try beat the masses?

I get the support the little guy attitude, but surely thats irrespective of race?

Posted By: mbro
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:44am

Cedric wrote:

I've only been buying black for years now.

-------------

Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos.

Posted By: Darur
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:45am

Ehh, let em do it.

Its bad economic principals, but more money being spent is always good.

-------------
Real Men play Tuba

[IMG]http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/1859/newsmall6xz.jpg">

PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf!

http://www.tippmann.com/forum/wwf77a/log_off_user.asp" rel="nofollow - DONT CLICK ME!!1

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:53am

Remember, black people can't be racist.

Posted By: IMPULS3.
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 4:59am

choopie911 wrote:

Remember, black people can't be racist.

-------------

Posted By: Bunkered
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 6:43am

choopie911 wrote:

Remember, black people can't be racist.

At least not according to Monica Conyers, Detroit City Councilwoman.

-------------

Posted By: tallen702
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 10:11am

There would be a whole lot more black-owned businesses in this nation right now if their own race hadn't looted them and burned them all to the ground in 1968.

-------------
<Removed overly wide sig. Tsk, you know better.>

Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 10:52am

I only buy black.

We're talking about prostitutes right?

-------------
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 12:10pm

Once you buy black, you never go back.

-------------

irc.esper.net
#paintball

Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:02pm

Yeah, I know, right? Protectionism is so silly:

arcticmonkey wrote:

So I don't know if anybody has heard about this new "buy American 'movement'" starting up in Chicago but I think it is rediculus so I want to see everyones thoughts on it.

Basically an American couple in Chicago decided to stop purchasing any products OR services not made specifically by American-owned or operated companies. They complain that foreign companies control the market because ever since people were allowed to buy foreign products they went there instead of buying 'American' products and stores that could provide them with better business, but because of the 'foreign products' now cannot flourish.

Highlighted quotes from the story:

"When we were a community of Americans who could not buy foreign products or patronize foreign-owned stores, our community of American stores and products flourished," Brown said. "When we were given the opportunity to go into the foreign-owned store, it was like nothing else mattered anymore and we wanted to go to buy the foreign products, regardless of what the American store provided. We could have the same or better products if we supported (American businesses) in the same way."

"We've still got that 'foreign stuff is better' mentality," he said. "We can't take us for granted. When we go to our establishments, it's almost like we're doing a favor. That ought to be a given for us."

-------------

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?

Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:30pm

Win, PP. Such unbridled win.

-------------

irc.esper.net
#paintball

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:46pm

You can't really compare people deciding to buy locally to support their country and community, and people going "Screw whitey"

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:49pm

choopie911 wrote:

You can't really compare people deciding to buy locally to support their country and community, and people going "Screw whitey"

Why not?

The intentions are exactly the same.

Hey, it actually does work both ways:

choopie911 wrote:

You can't really compare people deciding to buy from their own people to support their culture and community, and people going "Screw foreigners"

Posted By: MeanMan
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 1:56pm

People like that need a punch to the face. That's my opinion.

They think they know what they're doing, but they don't.

Heck, now the white side of the city should only buy from white stores.... Wait a second, it's like a step backwords in time!!!!!

-------------

hybrid-sniper~"To be honest, if I see a player still using an Impulse I'm going to question their motives."

Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:08pm

agentwhale007 wrote:

Hey, it actually does work both ways:

choopie911 wrote:

You can't really compare people deciding to buy from their own people to support their culture and community, and people going "Screw foreigners"

After all, they did take our jerbs.

-------------

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:25pm

But you're changing words in my scenario to make it the same..... that doesn't work.

Yes the concept is the same, but you are hurting your local economy over an issue of skin colour. I have never cared about the race of a shop owner when I choose to shop there or not. Doing so would be pretty messed up. "Dude I cant buy shoes there...the guy that owns the store is black..."

Never. Again, this is an example of blatant racism, and just general sillyness, but it's totally ok because its not white people doing it.

Posted By: usafpilot07
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:28pm

That's a huge stretch PP. I'm not saying either one is right, but they're not the same issue. Supporting the country's hurting economy, when actually based on a belief that your money should be staying in the country, is an economic idea.

The two issues would only be related if someone refused to buy foreign products because they were prejudice against the maker of whatever product was in question.

-------------
Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:44pm

choopie911 wrote:

you are hurting your local economy over an issue of skin colour.

How so? You are supporting the economy that you want to support.

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:49pm

usafpilot07 wrote:

if someone refused to buy foreign products because they were prejudice against the maker of whatever product was in question.

How do you see prejudice in the original idea? The group wants black-owned businesses to be successful, so they are only purchasing the goods and services of black-owned businesses.

How is that at all different from wanting a country's economy to be successful, so you only purchase goods and services from American-owned businesses?

The two concepts are comically similar.

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:54pm

choopie911 wrote:

Again, this is an example of blatant racism

Silly perhaps, but I am missing what makes his racist.

She is not saying that white businesses should be shut down. She is not saying that black people should not be allowed to show in white owned businesses, or visa versa. She is not saying white businesses are inferior to black businesses.

Please, explain how this is racist? Because it seems to me the basis of what makes something "racist" has been lost in political and social dialogue. Your statement is strikingly similar to the ignorant claims made post-election that because blacks voted largely for Obama, it in turn made them racist.

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 2:56pm

agentwhale007 wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Again, this is an example of blatant racism

Silly perhaps, but I am missing what makes his racist. She is not saying that white businesses should be shut down. She is not saying that black people should not be allowed to show in white owned businesses, or visa versa. She is not saying white businesses are inferior to black businesses. Please, explain how this is racist? Because it seems to me the basis of what makes something "racist" has been lost in political and social dialogue. Your statement is strikingly similar to the ignorant claims made post-election that because blacks voted largely for Obama, it in turn made them racist.

How is that not racism? Making decisions about which stores you will shop at based on the skin colour of the owner....

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:01pm

choopie911 wrote:

agentwhale007 wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Again, this is an example of blatant racism

Silly perhaps, but I am missing what makes his racist. She is not saying that white businesses should be shut down. She is not saying that black people should not be allowed to show in white owned businesses, or visa versa. She is not saying white businesses are inferior to black businesses. Please, explain how this is racist? Because it seems to me the basis of what makes something "racist" has been lost in political and social dialogue. Your statement is strikingly similar to the ignorant claims made post-election that because blacks voted largely for Obama, it in turn made them racist.

How is that not racism? Making decisions about which stores you will shop at based on the skin colour of the owner....

Racism is not simply making decisions based on race.

Racism is the inner belief of inherent superiority of one race, meaning other races are inferior.

So again, how is this racism? Where does it say that her belief is that white goods and services, because they are white-owned, are inherently inferior?

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:03pm

Alright, well this is ethnic discrimination then.

Posted By: Benjichang
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:08pm

Is it really considered discrimination though? No one is forcing anyone to shop anywhere. If you are black and you don't shop at a stored owned by whites, you're not depriving them of something they're entitled to. It might be racially motivated, but I wouldn't be too quick to pull a discrimination or racism card here.

-------------

irc.esper.net
#paintball

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:09pm

choopie911 wrote:

Alright, well this is ethnic discrimination then.

Which brings me back to the original point, though: How is someone choosing to "buy black" any different from someone choosing to "buy American/Canadian/whatever?"

And, by your own choice of definition, wouldn't that then be discrimination?

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:12pm

Benjichang wrote:

but I wouldn't be too quick to pull a discrimination or racism card here.

It's pretty funny, in my opinion, to watch people who complain about others (Jesse Jackson, etc) pulling the race card on everything immediately turn and cry racism on something as simple as what this lady is doing.

Posted By: Frozen Balls
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:12pm

agentwhale007 wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Alright, well this is ethnic discrimination then.

Possibly, yes, but that's a grasp at most.

Which brings me back to the original point, though: How is someone choosing to "buy black" any different from someone choosing to "buy American/Canadian/whatever?"

And, by your own choice of definition, wouldn't that then be discrimination?

That's nationalism, and it's pretty cool.

I kinda agree with choopie on this. Like, it's one thing to support your local stores, but it's a little weak to do so for the color of their skin.

I thought we were trying to move past color? How is this helping?

-------------

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:16pm

agentwhale007 wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Alright, well this is ethnic discrimination then.

Which brings me back to the original point, though: How is someone choosing to "buy black" any different from someone choosing to "buy American/Canadian/whatever?" And, by your own choice of definition, wouldn't that then be discrimination?

Yes, technically you could call that discrimination if you wanted, but it still has nothing to do with race/ ethnicity. I absolutely think there is a difference between "Buy American" and "Buy white"

I can't even imagine the backlash if I tried to start a movement of white shoppers only patronizing white stores. If the shopkeeper/ employee is anything but white, dont shop there. Yeah that would go over great.

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:19pm

choopie911 wrote:

Yes, technically you could call that discrimination if you wanted, but it still has nothing to do with race/ ethnicity.

Right, the difference is nationality. What's the difference?

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:24pm

agentwhale007 wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Yes, technically you could call that discrimination if you wanted, but it still has nothing to do with race/ ethnicity.

Right, the difference is nationality. What's the difference?

Nationality is where you live, not your ancestry. I could go live in Russia right now if I wanted, and become a Russian. I cannot go become a black person (really)

All races live in America, so buying "American" isn't discriminating against black people, asians, first nations, etc. They are all American.

Buying black is discriminating against EVERYONE that isn't black.

Posted By: agentwhale007
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:33pm

choopie911 wrote:

agentwhale007 wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Yes, technically you could call that discrimination if you wanted, but it still has nothing to do with race/ ethnicity.

Right, the difference is nationality. What's the difference?

And " buying American" discriminates against EVERYONE who isn't American.

Posted By: MeanMan
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 3:52pm

Yes, but nationality isn't the same as race. You can pick nationality, not race.

If you say, I won't buy French cars. That's not saying that a race is less than another. If I say I won't buy a car from a black guy, there's no reason for that.

A country can have quality control issues, a past. But, a race doesn't have quality problems, because "we are all equal". Each race isn't their own area.

Would you feel differently if a white guy started a "don't buy black goods" following?
Perhaps double standards? Aren't we trying to escape that?

-------------

hybrid-sniper~"To be honest, if I see a player still using an Impulse I'm going to question their motives."

Posted By: Cedric
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 5:39pm

This thread is best summed up with a quote from Stephen Hawking;
"I've spent my entire life searching the skies for answers to questions man has yet to even ask. After I've done that, I buy everything from food, clothing, and even my newspaper only from black people."

-------------

Posted By: Darur
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 6:09pm

Some people in this thread could do with opening an economics text book.

-------------
Real Men play Tuba

[IMG]http://img89.imageshack.us/img89/1859/newsmall6xz.jpg">

PH33R TEH 1337 Dwarf!

http://www.tippmann.com/forum/wwf77a/log_off_user.asp" rel="nofollow - DONT CLICK ME!!1

Posted By: IMPULS3.
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 6:14pm

Black people own business's?

-------------

Posted By: arcticmonkey
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 6:18pm

IMPULS3. wrote:

Black people own business's?

I believe the correct term is actually 'bidnesses'

-------------

Posted By: .Ryan
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 10:19pm

IMPULS3. wrote:

choopie911 wrote:

Remember, black people can't be racist.

But yeah, I think it's stupid because it's both racist and protectionist....'Course, I disagree that trying to infuse money into the local economy is protectionist....so, I'm not sure where I stand in this thread....

-------------

Posted By: little devil
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 11:00pm

arcticmonkey wrote:

IMPULS3. wrote:

Black people own business's?

I believe the correct term is actually 'bidnesses'

Damn, I thought the correct term was "fronts"

Posted By: .636
Date Posted: 20 May 2009 at 11:53pm

I tried to buy a black person a few weeks ago and it did not work out too well

Then I moved onto a midget... no luck either :(

-------------

Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 May 2009 at 11:08am

usafpilot07 wrote:

That's a huge stretch PP. I'm not saying either one is right, but they're not the same issue. Supporting the country's hurting economy, when actually based on a belief that your money should be staying in the country, is an economic idea.

The two issues would only be related if someone refused to buy foreign products because they were prejudice against the maker of whatever product was in question.

To the contrary, they are exactly the same.

They are the same because they are both founded in the same misguided belief that there is such a thing as a separate and distinct "black economy" or "US economy", separate from just "the economy."

When you single out an arbitrary slice of the economy to favor over another arbitrary slice - whatever your motivations - you are cutting off your nose to spite the face.

What is good for the goose is good for the gander. The primary predictor of the success of most segments of the economy is the success of the overall economy. And as we have just seen, when the overall economy suffers, each sub-economy suffers along with it.

The reality is that we are in a single global economy. "Buy American" clauses are harmful to the overall economy and to the US slice of the economy, and "buy black" provisions are harmful to the overall economy and to the black slice of the economy. Protectionism is bad no matter how you slice it.

-------------

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 21 May 2009 at 1:48pm

Peter Parker wrote:

usafpilot07 wrote:

That's a huge stretch PP. I'm not saying either one is right, but they're not the same issue. Supporting the country's hurting economy, when actually based on a belief that your money should be staying in the country, is an economic idea. The two issues would only be related if someone refused to buy foreign products because they were prejudice against the maker of whatever product was in question.

To the contrary, they are exactly the same.

They are the same because they are both founded in the same misguided belief that there is such a thing as a separate and distinct "black economy" or "US economy", separate from just "the economy."

When you single out an arbitrary slice of the economy to favor over another arbitrary slice - whatever your motivations - you are cutting off your nose to spite the face.

The argument isn't really about whether it is good for the economy or not, it's whether it is acceptable, or right, and I would say making ANY decision based on race, and race alone is wrong. Race should not be a deciding factor, especially not for where you shop, that is just ridiculous.

Posted By: Peter Parker
Date Posted: 21 May 2009 at 2:05pm

choopie911 wrote:

The argument isn't really about whether it is good for the economy or not, it's whether it is acceptable, or right, and I would say making ANY decision based on race, and race alone is wrong. Race should not be a deciding factor, especially not for where you shop, that is just ridiculous.

That may be what YOUR argument is about, but MY argument was specifically about the foolishness of pursuing bad economic policy for emotional reasons.

-------------

"E Pluribus Unum" does not mean "Every man for himself".

Pop Quiz: What do all the Framers of the Constitution have in common?

Posted By: Linus
Date Posted: 21 May 2009 at 2:07pm

Just posted on yahoo...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/17/AR2009051702053.html?g=0 - http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/17/AR2009051702053.html?g=0

Prices in urban corner stores are almost always higher, economists say. And sometimes, prices in supermarkets in poorer neighborhoods are higher. Many of these stores charge more because the cost of doing business in some neighborhoods is higher.

-------------

Posted By: choopie911
Date Posted: 21 May 2009 at 3:07pm

You needed to read a news article to realize that convenience stores cost more, and even more in bad locations?

Theres no competition, they can charge what they want. I assumed everyone was aware of corner stores charging more....