Current Events > This black male conservative breaks down BLM in under 30 minutes

(+) Yeah! (+)

https://hamiltonflourishing.org/blm

Let's all give Mr. Hampton a hand.

He just so happens to be the most organized effort in Eastern Tennessee to 'educate' black folk on how Republicans and specifically conservative Republicanism is the way to go.

If you know me, I'm on the other side of the fence myself.

Would you take a look at his video and give me your thoughts on him?
---

No, I don't think I'll listen to a bootlicker who is being crushed by the very boot he licks.

---

Pick a different gimmick

---

no

i dont need to be convinced of anything

black lives matter, period

---

TC's username is a far-right propaganda news network.
---

Oh sweetie

OANn posted...

Let's all give Mr. Hampton a hand.

---

gunplagirl posted...

No, I don't think I'll listen to a bootlicker who is being crushed by the very boot he licks.

But we have to understand the game that Republicans are playing in order to disrupt their terrorism.

The white supremacist terrorist attack on The Capitol is proof that they are out there.

Lost_All_Senses posted...

Pick a different gimmick

Did I ask your opinion?

no.
Mecha Sonic posted...

no

i dont need to be convinced of anything

black lives matter, period

Thank you black lives matter.

DeadBankerDream posted...

TC's username is a far-right propaganda news network.

Did you look at the signature underneath what i post?

Sarcasm = The Onion
---

OANn posted...

Did I ask your opinion?

Yes, but it was for a stupid fucking question so we're giving you better opinions.

---

So i am sitting through this slog of his (Mr. Hampton, which btw is the last name of one of the BLM protestors in the irony of all things).

Mr. Hampton links BLM to:

Marxism
Lesbianism
An attack on western culture
Failing to state who the racists are
BLM not knowing the 'absence of fathers being the problem'
A threat to the United States / implied through the statement "they are dividing us up"

After going on a very well spoken attack (I will give him that, he attempts to come off as the Republican Barack Obama. NOPE!) he then find the real reason that black people are struggling.

.
Wait for it.

.
.
The absence of the black father in the home.

.
BASED.

I'm gonna have a nice drink and then sit back and let my black friends break down this man's statements about BLM. We grew up with black men like Mr. Hampton in Tennessee and Kentucky back in the 1990's. My father grew up with his father probably, his father might have been one of the Dixiecrat Black Democrats back in the 1950's and 60's. The same tired statements. The same "The black community is its own biggest enemy" type of mentality.
This guy makes me want to tear my hair out. He is tone deaf, maybe inside his own self-imposed echo chamber.

Got no one to vent to about this right now, but when a black man starts talking about absent fathers and literacy rates, that is damn near a sellout to Eugenics and the right wing talking point of which race is smarter than the other.

.
There are a lot of black 'Conservatives' popping up, do not let these people use their mind numbing garbage to initiate a younger generation. Do not let these so-called Christians slither their way into the schools and start talking about "bring God back to the schools" or all the other nonsense.

These black men are sellout who in the 1950's/60's were Black Dixiecrats.
And today they are Christian, black male Republicans.

Gonna have two drinks after all!
fuck it.
---

OANn posted...

The white supremacist terrorist attack on The Capitol is proof that they are out there.

The capital rioters werent white supremacists

coh posted...

The capital rioters werent white supremacists

They were, though

---

Fuck off, TC

---

coh posted...

The capital rioters werent white supremacists

I'm sure they say that.

---

coh posted...

The capital rioters werent white supremacists

Then who were they?

---

coh posted...

The capital rioters werent white supremacists

Then who were they? What were they?

MrMallard posted...

Fuck off, TC

Did your parents teach you manners?

EnvoyOfTheLight posted...

I'm sure they say that.

If I posted this on a conserative website, they'd probably think i was attacking them.
https://imgflip.com/i/4q2s4k
Conflict posted...

Although I didn't realize at first glance that you weren't being serious. There are too many accounts on here that post shit like that and actually mean it

If someone says something in Irony to an ironic 'news' source, he just might well be telling the truth.

Speaking of which, is their any truth to the rumor that Andew Breitbart was going to do a Brutus to Steve Bannon?
---

The fact that the asshole messes up the WEB DuBois messages pisses me off. Like Booker T. Washington he is booklicker and I hope he is grifter.

---

is the TC Cornhuskers?

---

cjsdowg posted...

The fact that the asshole messes up the WEB DuBois messages pisses me off. Like Booker T. Washington he is booklicker and I hope he is grifter.

Anyone can comment on this guy's youtube chann.....

OH. Comments are off.

GOOD. So that means anyone can make a re: Hamilton Flourishing: The Real Agenda of Black Lives Matter with Patrick D. Hampton video with comments turned on.
---

OANn posted...

Then who were they? What were they?

A bunch of pissed off Trump supporters

Oh bless his heart
https://twitter.com/PatrickDHampton/status/1351895075580731392
---

Conflict posted...

I wouldn't bother engaging coh unless you're interested in losing brain cells

why

So this new alt. account belongs to whom?

---

It looks to clearly be cornhusker.

---

lmao

---

Conflict posted...

Because you're a fucking idiot.

Rude. Also wrong

coh posted...

Rude. Also wrong

---

coh posted...

Rude. Also wrong

I think we can get along, this topic is about a black Conservative Christian after all.
---

He is pissed. Royally pissed.

And conservatism is the way to go for nobody except rich assholes and bootlickers of said rich assholes.

---

At one in history Southernfatman, conservatism was the way of Billy Graham and a whole slew of good people who saw the evils of segregation. Franklin Graham being nothing like his father.
---

my thoughts as the video progressed:

• while hampton is correct about the existence of the washington vs du bois philosophical dynamic, arguably ongoing to this day; iirc sowell himself disputed the alleged extent to which there was a heated rivalry between washington and du bois themselves, instead suggesting that while there were major differences in their philosophical praxis, their relationship was best characterized as respectful and even cooperative as they shared common end goals
• i doubt hampton's claim that du bois ever advocated rioting or violence. if anyone is more well-read (i've mainly read du bois's sociological writings), please fact check the claim, because if false (which i suspect it is) it's very damaging slander.
• washington's praxis was especially pragmatic in his native south, but a suboptimal standalone strategy in the north, which was also receptive to du bois's praxis; meanwhile, du bois's praxis was especially pragmatic in his native north, but would have put activists and black communities in danger if used in the nadir-era south. their strategies were products of their environments at the time and best geared to such.
• malcolm x did not advocate going against the law, at least to the extent that one was not physically endangered by unjust manifestations of the law.
• though hampton makes a thinly veiled attempt to characterize malcolm as a duboisian and king as a washingtonian, i'd argue the opposite was the case, with king's emphasis on peaceful protest as a means to encourage legal changes to improve both social and economic conditions, and malcolm's emphasis on a do-for-self approach to organic economic and social development independent of dependence on state action.
• with the previous point in mind, the prominence of blm is not the first time the dubois praxis has gone "mainstream".
• though i'm not sure what the organization's actual intent is, i do not believe that the critique of the nuclear family unit is inherently bad, even from a conservative angle. it is after all a manifestation of societal atomization brought about by the industrial and post-industrial eras - a convenient end product of the breakdown of the extended family, the latter which in my opinion did a far better job of instilling organic values than two parents alone could ever do.
• intersectionality just refers to the general advocacy of under-represented demographics within demographics having a voice in the greater societal discourse. sojourner truth's "ain't i a woman" speech is arguably a foundational example of this. the modern baggage/connotations the term has picked up with respect to rhetorical patterns associated with it, in my opinion, stem from external ideological/philosophical sources - what these sources are, i know not. hampton conflates the former with the latter, when this is not always the case.

with that all said, that video did not prove to be the bombshell expose hampton insinuated it would be. he might have wanted to touch down on the former blm cincinatti chapter's critique of the organization's leadership, or further explored the topic of funding.

---

cjsdowg posted...

@cjsdowg while i'm also disappointed that he grossly mischaracterized du bois's ideas, i strongly recommend that you take the time to do in-depth research/reading of booker t. washington for a better understanding of his life, work, and ideas. he was absolutely not the dreadful term that you used to refer to him.

though time has a way of oversimplifying how people are perceived, the real story is always far more nuanced.

---

"the absence of the black father"

yeah maybe if the racist prison industrial complex and piss poor state of the public educational system as a result of centuries of white supremacy didn't happen

TheMikh posted...

my thoughts as the video progressed:

* while hampton is correct about the existence of the washington vs du bois philosophical dynamic, arguably ongoing to this day, iirc sowell himself disputed the alleged extent to which there was a heated rivalry between washington and du bois themselves, instead suggesting that while there were major differences in their philosophical praxis, their relationship was best characterized as respectful and even cooperative as they shared common end goals
* i doubt hampton's claim that du bois ever advocated rioting or violence. if anyone is more well-read (i've mainly read du bois's sociological writings), please fact check the claim, because if false (which i suspect it is) it's very damaging slander.
* washington's praxis was especially pragmatic in his native south, but a suboptimal standalone strategy in the north, which was also receptive to du bois's praxis; meanwhile, du bois's praxis was especially pragmatic in his native north, but would have put activists and black communities in danger if used in the nadir-era south. their strategies were products of their environments at the time and best geared to such.
* malcolm x did not advocate going against the law, at least to the extent that one was not physically endangered by unjust manifestations of the law.
* though hampton makes a thinly veiled attempt to characterize malcolm as a duboisian and king as a washingtonian, i'd argue the opposite was the case, with king's emphasis on peaceful protest as a means to encourage legal changes to improve both social and economic conditions, and malcolm's emphasis on a do-for-self approach to organic economic and social development independent of dependence on state action.
* with the previous point in mind, the prominence of blm is not the first time the dubois praxis has gone "mainstream".
* though i'm not sure what the organization's actual intent is, i do not believe that the critique of the nuclear family unit is inherently bad, even from a conservative angle. it is after all a manifestation of societal atomization brought about by the industrial and post-industrial eras - a convenient end product of the breakdown of the extended family, the latter which in my opinion did a far better job of instilling organic values than two parents alone could ever do.
* intersectionality just refers to the general advocacy of under-represented demographics within demographics having a voice in the greater societal discourse. sojourner truth's "ain't i a woman" speech is arguably a foundational example of this. the modern baggage/connotations the term has picked up with respect to rhetorical patterns associated with it, in my opinion, stem from external ideological/philosophical sources - what these sources are, i know not. hampton conflates the former with the latter, when this is not always the case.

with that all said, that video did not prove to be the bombshell expose hampton insinuated it would be. he might have wanted to touch down on the former blm cincinatti chapter's critique of the organization's leadership, or further explored the topic of funding.

So thankful i made this topic and 10x more thankful for the responses, this is going to help a lot.

Now with that said, i've been invited to read Karl Marx and Mao Zedong but afraid too because my reading level may be at college level but my ability to break down and refute propaganda is limited at best.

Isn't that we have each other for? If a friend cannot cook the fish, he brings his other friend over and his friend can have half.

I'm jealous of the work you did TheMikh. Do you have a Masters or PhD? I am not trying to be a goober (southern term for a loveable jerk or goof off who wants attention.)
---

OANn posted...

Now with that said, i've been invited to read Karl Marx and Mao Zedong but afraid too because my reading level may be at college level but my ability to break down and refute propaganda is limited at best.

i have yet to read mao, though his genius supposedly lied in military tactics. i'd imagine he was politically savvy as well, but his economic implementations left much to be desired to say the least. if i had a lot of reading time on my hands i'd probably take a deep dive on the philosophies of his successors, particularly deng, jiang, hu, and xi.

as for marx, the communist manifesto is pretty short and shallow, but his magnum opus is kapital. the latter, however, is very dry and misses the forest for the trees with respect to the question of economic value.

lenin is more interesting to read than marx imo.

i'd also like to explore gramsci at some point if time and energy permitted.

I'm jealous of the work you did TheMikh. Do you have a Masters or PhD? I am not trying to be a goober (southern term for a loveable jerk or goof off who wants attention.)

i didn't do graduate studies in history, but have spent a lot of my spare time reading sociology, history, autobiographies - particularly older works - pertaining to black american history and historical figures among other topics, perhaps to have a more comprehensive understanding of what it means to black in america myself.

to return to your earlier point, to avoid the propagandization you're concerned about in general, older books - nonfiction works ideally written by historical figures themselves or impartial contemporaries - are the best way to go. this is not to say primary source authors do not have their biases, and so it's good to delve into a myriad of "counterpoint" writings for lack of better words - authors critiquing the ideas of other authors/ideas of a different school of thought - to add additional dimensions to understanding of a topic. as a rule, the ideals some authors put forth may be flawed or shortsighted at times, but their criticisms of others' points tend to be particularly illuminating.

---

I reported you OAnn

---

k

---

TheMikh posted...

hile i'm also disappointed that he grossly mischaracterized du bois's ideas, i strongly recommend that you take the time to do in-depth research/reading of booker t. washington for a better understanding of his life, work, and ideas. he was absolutely not the dreadful term that you used to refer to him.

though time has a way of oversimplifying how people are perceived, the real story is always far more nuanced.

Thanks for the post , I am always up for talking about these two.
I understand what some people say about Washington. However he was smart man, and clearly this idea of black people working hard and showing the way man that we were people did work in the past. Frederick Douglass
encouraged African Americans to fight in the Civil War.

Once let the black man get upon his person the brass letter, U.S., let him get an eagle on his button, and a musket on his shoulder and bullets in his pocket, there is no power on earth that can deny that he has earned the right to citizenship."

.

But they did deny that, even when most black people were slaves. African American fought for this nation. There is not major war that America has had that African Americans have no fought and died in. That should have already proved African American value. So there was nothing African Americans could do by working and keeping their heads down that would have been enough for the people of the era. To finally say, you know what let's stop being racist.
Booker T. Washington was a safe black person that did did not rock the boat. Today he would have been Larry Elder. My hate for Washington is one deeply root in a lot of a research I have done about it. The fact that you know he was bad for black people. Is how much racist white people like him.


---