RationalWiki's 2020 Fundraiser

There is no RationalWiki without you. We are a small non-profit with no staff – we are hundreds of volunteers who document pseudoscience and crankery around the world every day. We will never allow ads because we must remain independent. We cannot rely on big donors with corresponding big agendas. We are not the largest website around, but we believe we play an important role in defending truth and objectivity.

If everyone who saw this today donated $5, we would meet our goal for 2021.

Fighting pseudoscience isn't free.
We are 100% user-supported! Help and donate $5, $20 or whatever you can today with PayPal Logo.png!

Donations so far: $3500Goal: $3500

Talk:AssataShakur.org

From RationalWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
Icon sociology.svg This article contains information about one or more living persons.

Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats.
Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed.
If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Icon internet.svg

This Internet related article has been awarded BRONZE status for quality. It's getting there, but could be better with improvement. See RationalWiki:Article rating for more information.

Copperbrain.png

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHHHHH[edit]

AAAAAAAAHHHHHH Balaam (talk) 13:32, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

That is some impressive green ink. Scarlet A.pngsshole 13:38, 8 November 2011 (UTC)

Laughing at black people is rational, you guise![edit]

How does publicly ridiculing and mocking black people contribute to 'rational' behavior? Is this necessary? What purpose do out-of-context quotes serve in informing the public?

Have you considered the fact that some of the people quoted in this article may be suffering from mental illness? Or that they are simply blowing off some steam? Is it so terrible that black people have their own website to speak their minds? I disagree with some of the things said on there, yes, but that doesn't mean that they are Literally (black) Hitler, as this overwrought, nonsensical webpage suggests.

RationalWiki doesn't seem so rational in their treatment of black people. What a joke! What a sham! You have truly disappointed me. As a black man, I wanted to believe that this was a sensible website, at least, until I saw all the hatred directed at black communities and black people. — Unsigned, by: 173.3.228.139 / talk 07:38, 5 October 2015 (UTC)

I'm a bit late to this, but I'll try and answer your point.
We are not "ridiculing and mocking black people" any more than our article on Stormfront ridicules and mocks white people. Have you considered that of the numerous pages on hate groups on this site, that the overwhelming majority of them are on white supremacist and neo-Nazi websites?
This article ties in with our mission because it is documentation of misinformation, bigotry, pseudoscience, fundamentalism, and all manner of shite that we are completely opposed to. You are indeed correct that many of these people may be mentally ill, or just "blowing off some steam". That is no excuse for what the forum in question promotes; namely a race-based call for hatred and genocide.
Thank you for your time, and have a good day. RoninMacbeth (talk) 03:54, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Lots of individual quotations[edit]

Would it not be better to address the attitudes of the site as a whole, rather than quoting individual, presumably unnoteworthy people on specific topics? —Kazitor, pending 05:48, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Yes —ClickerClock (talk) 07:30, 4 April 2018 (UTC)

Sources[edit]

Black Nationalist file + article on Southern Poverty Law Center. Black Nationalist organisations tend towards conspiracy but are great at black pride. UNIA-ACLWikipedia is a Black Nationalist organisation that did a lot of good but are conspiracy theorists who are misinforming young black kids about science. —ClickerClock (talk) 07:51, 4 April 2018 (UTC)