The best way to learn about American culture and American people in the late 20th century is to watch old episodes of Oprah, Donahue, Sally, Ricki Lake, Geraldo, etc. Daytime syndicated talk shows of this era dealt with whatever issue was facing the country and were completely democratic in how they took questions from regular people who walked in off the street or phoned in live from their living rooms.
Oprah was arguably the first black that millions of white Americans could relate to as a human being, and as such she served as a cultural translator, making the black experience accessible to millions of whites. As Roger Ebert said, “she was our first black President.”
Pumpkin Person 
no it wasn’t.
new word for peepee:
“in-group preference” https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/In-group_favoritism
of course this is racist, BUT the question is…”is it innate? can it be overcome?”
i think the answer is no.
this why poor whites vote against their own economic interests when they vote for the GOP. this is why the “solid south” meant solid democrat. “yellow dog democrat” = a term used in the former confederate states to mean “i’d sooner vote for a yellow dog than vote for a republican.” and the dems have ALWAYS been the party of the poor. it’s just that poor blacks didn’t count until the 60s.
Poor whites vote for their genetic interests, partly cause the affirmative action of the dems doesn’t serve their economic interests anyway.
the “anyway” should be underlined.
the contemporary clinton/corporate dems are NOT the party of the little man…of any race, sexual orientation, or gender.
identity politics is a yuge FAKE.
i’ll say it again.
the dems’ identity poltics has the effect (and the purpose) of AVOIDING economic issues.
bernie’s campaign had NO identity politics. he said, “open borders is a conservative policy.”
he and pretindian liz warren were the ONLY speakers at the dem convention who weren’t CORRUPT goblins.
black identity politics is TOTALLY understandable considering how under-represented blacks are among the elite and how over-represented blacks are among the…whatever the opposite of elite is.
applying this same logic to white gentiles yields “anti-semitism”.
it’s so obvious it hurts.
The question is whether blacks are underrepresented among the elite when you control for IQ. It depends how you define the elite. When it comes to money, yes, when it comes to status and influence, not so much.
the status and influence are FAKE peepee.
they’re just a tchotchke for sale in a jewish shop. pill doesn’t get it either.
it’s sad that you don’t get how utterly powerless and UN-influential oprah is.
she’s just a rabbit’s foot, a good luck charm, a token.
peepee is still trying to save capitalism for black people.
there’s no saving it.
i had no idea that canadians were just as brainwashed as americans.
american ideological imperialism is working.
sad!
Oprah was insanely powerful and influential for an individual, but individuals have very little power. The real power belongs to interest groups
oprah vs steve schwartzman is like tee-ball vs the yankees.
the revolution will not be televised!
what did gil scott-heron mean?
the truly powerful are not celebrities peepee. most have never heard of them.
mass media is mass DISTRACTION.
Oprah put a black man in the White House. What has Schwarzman done? Just cause he’s jewish doesn’t mean he’s omnipotent. Don’t confuse the power of the player with the power of the team he plays for
Schwarzmann controls the people in the white house no matter who you vote for. He can also organise donations to people.
Jimmy Dore read out an article saying dems are having the worst fundraising since 2003, even though the media is pushing trump hysteria. And he also noted republicans are leading for the first time in decades in small donations.
The democrat party is dead. The only way to save it is to decapitate it.
Name a single historical event of any significance that would not have occurred if Schwarzmann was never born.
Stupid response.
the only way to save it is to purge it and replace the purged with berniebots.
Wow, i could have wrote that script word for word. Thats amazing.
Antiracist Hitler.
Genius.
Identify a group of people who are more prone to commit crimes is racism? Identify a group of people who are more prone to be disrespectful with other people without any rational reason only their primitivism is racism?
White people on avg is that piece of albo-$hit. The great of sin of black people is that they still is worse than white crap. Yellow people is another example of why humanity look so hopeless.
Real racism in the way people “understand” only can be committed against INNOCENT people. Against criminal thugs it’s just instinct of survive and it’s absolutely recommendable, as well with this of any “true colors”. And unfortunately the clever thugs are too bright to hide behind their “$$$uccess”.
Yes, this is a good point. Racism is actually very rational – people are wary of blacks and jews for a reason. I generally dont see people as instinctively hostile to asians, latinos and browns.
During the Oprah episode I posted in my article, a woman calls into the show to say she too would be scared if the black guy sat next to her on a bus. When he pressed her to explain why she couldn’t explain it, but it’s obviously because he’s extremely dark skinned. I think humans naturally fear darkness so extremely black skinned people will be feared unless they’re Caucasoid looking Indian computer geeks.
Its the testosterone level.
And its true – 50% + of women are raped in Africa at least once in their lifetime.
Yes the explanation is dark skin + masculine features. Dark skin alone doesn’t necessarily look scary (think of most black babies. Although some of them can be a little intimidating. I hate babies).
Facial expression intimidate more than any other feature.
and even if it were irrational this doesn’t mean anything can be done about it. for the most part humans are just trained monkeys who rationalize their gut instincts.
what is invisible to peepee.
Hilary clintons new book. Listen to the excerpts.
(1) She didn’t write them herself.
(2) The rage is psychopathic type rage.
(3) I would now agree with someone who said Hilary is the most hideous and revolting politician alive.
Merkel is the german version of hilary. Constant lying. No beliefs. Serves the eye meticulously for prestige and power.
Lion talking about islam. Funny how we know more about how islam spread in the 7th century, than we do about how the ashkenzi jews came to be.
‘Weird’.
Almost like the most neurotic high IQ race of man in the world suddenly became completely uninterested in their own history for no reason.
they don’t know it, but they are doing it.
Oxford univserity prof agrees with me that she is a psychopath:
https://newspunch.com/oxford-university-hillary-clinton/
But if you listen to her at age 21 she sounds earnest.
If you read Dianne Feinstein’s biography and Hilarys you can make an alternate case that they were true believers in social justice who eventually realised the reality of racial genetics and/or became corrupted after joining the system.
A good piece of counter evidence though is that both hilarys brothers have been convicted for fraud, so you imagine the genetics is there.
The moron scored trump the same as hitler, worse even. You can delete the graphic and oxford reference.
Just goes to show, when your testosterone is low, you are liable to throw vagina juice at anything.
Trump is probably 90th percentile or higher in psychopathy. But he’s not more psychopathic than the Clintons. I can guarantee.
”Trump is probably 90th percentile or higher in psychopathy. ”
I doubt. He is a case of non-pyschopathic uber-masculine asshole. Real and efficient psychopaths RARELY reveal who they really are.
That’s an interesting point. I once remember reading some old interview with Trump where he admitted he couldn’t trust anyone in business. I thought this was interesting because a true sociopath would never admit to being perpetually suspicious.
I dont know what youre dressing your burgers with these days gman. But saying trump is a psychopath is sjw level hysteria.
Deal would say something like that.
Splash some water on your face
FUCK U BITCH I EAT WUT I WANT
yes. sad! only pill and i are not controlled by the (((media))).
I’m surprised Gandhi didn’t score higher. He liked to sleep in bed with little girls.
He did?! No way.
http://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2017/08/ghana-sentences-day.html
Gandhi also hated blacks (like many subcontinentals).
The irony is that Trump’s braggadacio/arrogance/narcissism would be considered normal in a black dude. Or even in some Latino groups. But it seems weird coming from a professional white man.
Yes & before trump started acting racist, he was more popular with blacks than with whites
Whites have been conditioned by neo-Marxism to feel guilty about their wealth, viewing it as theft from non-whites taken during slavery and colonialism
“neo-marxism” is something peepee just made up. sad!
identity politics is the exact opposite of marxism. peepee is just another sheeple. sad!
a joke. pill takes psychiatry way too seriously.
hitler loved animals THEREFORE he was not a sociopath.
hillary ran over her own dog THEREFORE she is a sociopath.
Yes a lot of these neo-Marxist types run over their dogs because they see pets as a mass distraction promoted by the bourgeois to hide structural institutional racism
LOLWUT?
LOLWUT?
If you’re busy walking your dog, then you’re too busy to notice the way the white straight male bourgeois is oppressing the black gay female proletariat, thus the ruling class keeps its workers poor and complacent by giving them puppies to keep them happy as a form of mass distraction, so tragically one of the tenets of neomarxism is to run over your dog as a rebellion against racial and class oppression.
Read your Chomsky!
I think trump thinks hes in a lot of trouble to be doing rallies around the nation like this. I see what hes doing….I suspect trump knows the JFK was shot by the deep state….I wonder what hes thinking with these rallies.
Its very odd to see a sitting president in campaign mode like this.
Trump is a 3d chess master. I don’t understand everything he does. But he does most things right obviously (see his life results).
I think trump thinks hes in a lot of trouble to be doing rallies around the nation like this
And he’s right. Its one thing to attack Hispanics, Muslims, and even blacks, but once you start defending Nazis, you’re attacking Jews, and that’s the one group no president can afford to attack directly.
but a presidents can afford to. if trump attacked (((them))) by name in a direct address to the american people he would win. (((they))) would lose.
Im very interested in that. Whether a president would finally say it. He came very very close in his ‘false song of globalism’ speech.
if he also went after wall street and his fellow real estate developers but didn’t touch productive industries like mining, construction, manufacturing, etc. then you would know for sure who he really meant.
Without reading anything written, post or comment, my estimation is that PP is essentially arguing that Oprah’s television show reflects a candid microcosm of the US and because of its candidness relative to other metrics it’s liable to produce a more representative conclusion than those less candid metrics.
He’s also probably ignoring (Even if he’s mentioned that it’s a possibility, he’s not factoring it into his eventual conclusion as much as he should be) that Oprah’s TV show is intentionally sensationalized to get ratings, and does so through pulling at Heartstrings and making Oprah’s position look favourable relative to an opposing guest, this supports Oprah’s popularity and credibility, guests are also selectively chosen so the show’s audience has a strong element of sample-bias.
Is it a microcosm? Yes. Is it the candid microcosm that I’m assuming PP is claiming it is? No.
Yes I overstated my case, though in the early days, when Oprah had a shoestring budget, all the shows were live, and she had to beg random strangers walking down the street to be in her studio audience, there was much less manipulation than in the later years when she had a billion dollar brand to promote and a platoon of staffers to mastermind things from behind the scenes.
My larger point is that daytime talk shows are one of those rare historical mediums where you got a relatively unfiltered view of what average Americans thought about the issues of the day. Almost all other TV shows were people reading a script or the elites talking with each other and certainly historic books, magazines and newspapers all reflect elite opinion too. But when Phil Donahue got off the stage and ventured into the audience with his microphone for the first time, thus inventing this genre of TV, it was quite revolutionary.
But yes, as the field got more and more competitive and money hungry, there were all kinds of tricks and shenanigans to make the shows more riveting and exciting, so the image I paint is rather idealized, although given the low budget of most syndicated talk shows and the fact that they were produced every day instead of once a week, there generally wasn’t the time or money to be anywhere near as manipulative as their descendent shows (reality TV) are.
>and she had to beg random strangers walking down the street to be in her studio audience, there was much less manipulation than in the later years when she had a billion dollar brand to promote and a platoon of staffers to mastermind things from behind the scenes.
I think you’re underestimating her intelligence if you think she didn’t make it her business to attempt to beg “The Right kind” of people, capital R on Right for reasons obvious to everyone.
On top of that she has the social intelligence to manipulate members of the audience to disclose information in such a way as to imply conclusions the audience member themselves is not necessarily actually in agreement with, to misrepresent their views and construct a strawman of their position, intentions and beliefs that they lack the intellectual familiarity with to refute, they may even end up accepting her false conclusions and assume it’s a product of their own subconscious racism, for example that those conclusions have been drawn by themselves, or even if they attempt to refute they may do so with such clumsy language it appears further incriminating.
Take this for example: “During the Oprah episode I posted in my article, a woman calls into the show to say she too would be scared if the black guy sat next to her on a bus. When he pressed her to explain why she couldn’t explain it, but it’s obviously because he’s extremely dark skinned.”, Oprah’s verbal talents have left you convinced that there’s a subconsciously racist element to it where none has been disclosed, and more than likely not even intended, the lady lacking the intelligence to explain her position probably developed it as a result of learning over a lifetime about high black rates of violent crime, whatever you assume the cause to be.
Oprah creates a tacit strawman which she then leads you to accept and develop on, thereby accepting her implied conclusion as though it were your own.
You haven’t made a case for the honesty of Daytime TV, you’ve made a strong case for Oprah’s rhetorical genius, though. It’s even worked on you.
>My larger point is that daytime talk shows are one of those rare historical mediums where you got a relatively unfiltered view of what
Already addressed.
To beat the rac-ism pavolnian coditioning, the person must attack the premise at the root. The woman shuld have said blacks do more crime because the have high t. Make oprah defend it. Keep repeati g stories which she can make up about black crime. People will believe any story because blacks do crazy things anyway.
And we tend to hate ”blacks” [on avg] in the same way we tend to hate ”teenagers”, because they are, on avg, the same, 😉
Replace blacks with homosexuals in this sentence.
There are teenagers and teenagers. When I compare blacks with teenagers I’m talking about irritating and disrespectful teenagers, something that the avg homo tend not to be. Both tend to gave juvenile behaviors maybe true but in different vibes.
Indeed seems more easier to deal with homos than with heteros. And avg black man and specially those on the thug zone are hyper masculine, that is the opposite pole of homosexual average behavior. I know in cognitive aspect black men tend to look more “feminine” or “ambiguous” because they tend to lack on math and spatial skills but in non-cognitive aspects they are/have extreme masculine brains.
Trump thrasing ‘special interests’ in the media was incredible in phoenix. He really went there
he said fox had been fair to him. so he named (((them))), just with another word.
The funniest part of the speech was where he did 5 minutes on what he said in his statements and then started talking about the usual america is a nation of all colours crap and then said the following: I dont care where youre from – mexico…kenya ……scotland etc
Trump is such a devilish troll hahahaha.
there are three types of people. autists, sociopaths, and trolls.
Some people are avatars, 😉
Political correctness started in the late 60s but didn’t really kick into full gear until the mid-90s. It’s funny watching comedy from the early 90s or 80s that discuss certain taboos people can’t even mention in public today. Like that movie Soul Man.
But most people are still racist to some degree, they’re just afraid to violate the current social norms. I don’t think people have really changed that much at all.
Of course, most of these norms only involve what whites are allowed to say. Minorities don’t seem to be affected.
Whites are since always the main target.
Yes. It started maybe with bill clintons media consolidation deregulation act. Then the 6 evil sisters were formed.
Trump is funny in that sense. He has a great sense of humour actually. Its not appreciated because the brainwashed Deal with it types of this world take their programming very seriously.
His other funniest moments where saying Mika Brezinski was bleeding all over the place in his hotel after her facelift. Hahahaha.
Or the legendary, Megyn Kelly ‘bleeding out of her whatever; HAHAHAHAHA. Ill never forget when he tried to pretend it was something else and said the journalists were dirty minded for thinking what he probably meant.
I’m actually shuddering thinking about the evil racism that existed in the 80s.
Someone should do a horror movie about racists. And also make it a timely reminder of the magical nature of african americans that I am ashamed to forget sometimes. They should call it Get Out and Stay Down or ‘1 million years a slave when the aliens built the pyramids’.
if i were as paranoid as steve shoe or lion i would think tucker carlson was reading my comments.
later in the show tucker starts to sound like pill.
it may be that owners tell executives who tell producers who tell the talent not to talk about economic issues too much. because if they did it would be clear that american capitalism isn’t working for most americans.
If 80’ies racism was so bad, today’ s racism is more subtle. The HBD-commenter on Oprah’ show would say :
“Racism is correlated with people having a very low IQ. That’s why the Black are so racist.”